In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. CEB
WHY THE CLAUSE “THE WORD WAS GOD” WOULD NEVER
REFERS TO THE “DIVINE RELATIONSHIP OF THE TRINITY”
To avoid the difficulty of the “simple copula of identification,” other proponents of Christ-is-God theology assert that “there is a Divine relationship between the ‘Word’ and ‘God’ without absolute identification.” Says James M. Pratt in his booklet
The Deity of Jesus of Nazareth:
“The ‘Word’ (Gk.
logos)’was God’. John both identifies the Word as God as well as distinguishes Him from God. In other words, there is a Divine relationship between the ‘Word’ and ‘God’ without absolute identification. That is, while the Word is Deity. He is not the Father. For John, God is a larger entity than God the Father.” (Pratt, pp. 48-49)
Pratt’s interpretation of “was” in the clause “the Word was God” conforms to “simple copula of conclusion” rather than “simple copula of identification.” For him, the
Word was
God in the sense that the
Word is a member of a class of being known as
God. Neither the
Word alone
God nor is the
Father alone
God. He said, “
God is a larger entity than God the Father.” Pratt’s interpretation can be summarized in the words of Professor Murray J. Harris:
Murray J. Harris - Wikipedia
“Like the Father, and equally with him, the Logos may be included within the category of Deity as a partaker in the divine essence.” (Harris, p. 67)
In other words, the reason why there is no absolute identification between the
Word and the
Father, only divine relationship, is they are both parts of a larger entity,
God, where one is
God the Father and the other is
God the Son. This is how trinitarians interpret the third clause of John 1:1 (“the Word was God”).
However, even those scholars who uphold the trinity doctrine admit that the absence of any reference to the so-called God the Holy Spirit in the verse, is a gaping hole in that argument. Says Professor Harris:
“…the articular θεὸς [theos] could not refer to the divine essence (‘the Word was with the divine nature’ is nonsensical) or to the trinitarian God (since ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν [en pros ton theon] is predicated of the Logos-Son and the Spirit is not mentioned or alluded to elsewhere in the Prologue).” (Harris, p. 55)
This interpretation of John 1:1 that it shows divine relation between the Father and the Word, that they are both parts of a larger entity,
God, where one is
God the Father and the other is
God the Son,
is also very difficult to defend because John would never conforms with the idea that
God the Father is only a part of a larger entity,
God.
John wrote Jesus’ statement giving distinction between Jesus and the Father like what is written in John 14:28:
“You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, FOR THE FATHER IS GREATER THAN I.” (John 14:28 NIV,
emphasis mine)
John also wrote Jesus’ statement giving distinction between Jesus and God:
“I AM A MAN who has told you the truth which I HEARD FROM GOD, but you are trying to kill me. Abraham did nothing like that.” (John 8:40-41 NCV,
emphasis mine)
“If anyone chooses to do God's will, he will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own.” (John 7:17 NIV)
But John never made a distinction between God and the Father, because he wrote Jesus’ statement that identified the Father as the one and only trie God:
“Jesus said these things. Then, raising his eyes in prayer, he said: Father, it's time…
“And this is the real and eternal life: THAT THEY KNOW YOU, THE ONE AND ONLY TRUE GOD, And Jesus Christ, whom you sent.” (John 17:1 and 3 The Message,
emphasis ours)
In fact, nowhere in the entire book of the
Gospel According to John that John ever make a distinction between God and the Father let alone hint that there is “a larger entity” than
God the Father. This statement wrote by Apostle Paul refutes the trinitarian belief that there is “a larger entity” than God the Father:
“One God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all.” (Ephesians 4:6 RSV)
Therefore, the assertion that there is a larger entity than
God the Father is without biblical basis. How can there be a larger entity than the Creator of all things Himself? Says Apostle Paul:
“Yet there is for us only one God, the Father, who is the Creator of all things and for whom we live; and there is only one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things were created and through whom we live.” (I Corinthians 8:6 TEV)
Thus, the weakness of interpreting the trinity in John 1:1c is this interpretation presupposes more than what the verse actually states. Nowhere in the verse, nor in the entire book for that matter, does John ever make a distinction between God and the Father let alone hint that there is “a larger entity” than God the Father. Basing such an interpretation of John 1:1 on such presuppositions would be an exegetical argument, dependent ultimately on circular reasoning. Existence of the Trinity is first assumed in order to interpret the verse, and then the verse is used in order to defend the doctrine of the Trinity. For this reason alone, we can dismiss a trinitarian interpretation as unscriptural.
