Don't you see the problem, lostwanderingsoul?
Look closely.
You ask, "
Why can't the Word and the Father both be eternal with no beginning?"
Didn't we just answer that? Didn't you just acknowledge that,
according to the Bible, at Collosians 1:15, the Word had a beginning?
The problem is, to say otherwise is to go against that fact, and in so doing you would in reality be going against a basic law of truth -
Either A is B, or A is not B. A cannot be B, and at the same time not be B.
Either the Word had a beginning, or the Word did not have a beginning - Cannot be both.
You have to make up your mind.
If you say the word had no beginning, you have no scriptural basis for that, and your view conflicts with the scriptures.
If you accept the scriptures, including Colossians 1:15, which shows the Word had a beginning, there is no conflict with scriptures - including John 1:1.
Nowhere in John 1 does it say the Word is eternal, with no beginning. That would be your version of scripture.
I'll get back to John 1:1 in a moment, but first I want to say, I understand what your position is on who, or what God is, but I see many problems with that, also.
Let me explain what I mean.
Earlier, you said...
1.
There were two "persons" in existence for all time. The Father and the Word and the two together made up God. ... So there is no trinity but there is a Father and a Son who together are called God.
You gave an analogy in an attempt to explain.
2. Say there is a man named John Doe and he has a wife named Jane Doe and a son named Tom Doe. They are three different people but they are one Jones family. One family with several members. There is one God but that one God is like a family made up of a Father and a Son. Jesus is not the Father and the Father is not Jesus but together they are God.
Then you said
this...
3.
OK back to the original question. Why does God refer to himself as "us" in Genesis 1:26? Answer - because there was the one reffered to as God and the one reffered to as the Word. That is two beings. Plural. Us. And both of these beings make up the one and only God. There is no third person which some people include to make a trinity. But there are two.
I wanted to zero in on this, because I thought I understood what you believed, until you said something else later, in another thread
I usually take careful note of everything people say, as I am trying to understand their viewpoint. So I took note of your words in
this post.
4. I think of God as a family. You have one family but several members of that one family. You have one God but several members or parts of that one God. My problem with the idea of a trinity is that it forever limits God to those three persons. But God has said that He wants to adopt others into His family. Don't many people say they are children of God? Some day God's family will consist of millions of people. The trinity idea denies this possibility. God is not limited to three.
So that last bit helped me to understand your view much clearer... I think... I hope.
I tried to visualize it.
[GALLERY=media, 8857]Gdanim by nPeace posted Feb 26, 2019 at 12:55 PM[/GALLERY]
Your view is that God is, correct me if I am wrong, a state rather than a being or entity. My guess is... infinity, but made up of beings, or entities - the father (F), and the son (S), and as time progresses, angels (A), humans (P).
So basically God is the circle in my animation.
Oh, by the way, the Angels (A) that disappeared are the fallen.
That's a new one... an interesting idea imo. It steps away from the three-in-one concept (Trinity out), to embrace a two-in-one, but with extensions.
This is to me a good example of how we have more than 30,000 different Christian religions.
The first problem we dealt with - The son came after, so you would need to adjust it to the father (F),
then the son (S), and as time progresses, angels (A), humans (P).
However, there is no need for me to highlight all the problems this has, so I will just mention one.
So you are teaching someone, and you explain this concept to them. You explain that you don't say that you pray to God, you pray to the Father, because God is both the father and son, but not limited to them alone, it includes the angels, and those humans who go to heaven.
So your student says, "Okay, so in Genesis God - which is the father and son - created the heavens and earth"
Where are the angels at this time? If the angels exists, why are they not part of God? Or is the text wrong? Should it have read, "In the beginning, the father, or the son, or... created the heavens and earth?"
What about when the angel said, at Revelation 19:10, "Worship God!”? Did he mean worship the father, son, angels and humans? Or is the text wrong... should it have read, "Worship the father, and son."?
I see many problems with your concept lostwanderingsoul, but you are the one that believes it, not I. So I suppose you will deal with those in your own way.
Concerning John 1, the following information may be helpful.
I'll highlight the parts that deal specifically with key points. Although reading all of it, I think, would be great. Thanks for the conversation.
*** NEW WORLD TRANSLATION - Study Edition : John Study Notes - Chapter 1 ***
the beginning:
In the Scriptures, the meaning of the term “beginning” depends on the context. Here [John 1:1] the Greek word ar·kheʹ cannot refer to “the beginning” of God the Creator, for he is eternal, having no beginning. (Psalms 90:2) It must, therefore, refer to the time when God began creating. God’s first creation was termed the Word, a heavenly designation of the one who became Jesus. (John 1:14-17) So Jesus is the only one who can rightly be called “the firstborn of all creation.” (Colossians 1:15) He was “the beginning of the creation by God” (Revelation 3:14), so he existed before other spirit creatures and the physical universe were created. In fact, by means of Jesus, “all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth.” - Colossians 1:16; for other examples of how the term “beginning” is used, see study note on John 6:64.
the Word: Or “the Logos.” Greek, ho loʹgos. Here used as a title, it is also used at John 1:14 and Revelation 19:13. John identified the one to whom this title belongs, namely, Jesus. This title was applied to Jesus during his prehuman existence as a spirit creature, during his ministry on earth as a perfect man, and after his exaltation to heaven. Jesus was God’s Word of communication, or Spokesman, for conveying information and instructions to the Creator’s other spirit sons and to humans. So it is reasonable to think that prior to Jesus’ coming to earth, Jehovah on many occasions communicated with mankind through the Word, His angelic mouthpiece. - Genesis 16:7-11; 22:11; 31:11; Exodus 3:2-5; Judges 2:1-4; 6:11, 12; 13:3.
with: Lit., “toward.” In this context, the Greek preposition pros implies close proximity and fellowship. It also indicates separate persons, in this case, the Word and the only true God.
the Word was a god:
Or “the Word was divine [or, “a godlike one”].” This statement by John describes a quality or characteristic of “the Word” (Greek, ho loʹgos; see study note on the Word in this verse), that is, Jesus Christ. The Word’s preeminent position as the firstborn Son of God through whom God created all other things is a basis for describing him as “a god; a godlike one; divine; a divine being.” Many translators favor the rendering “the Word was God,” equating him with God Almighty. However, there are good reasons for saying that John did not mean that “the Word” was the same as Almighty God. First, the preceding clause and the following clause both clearly state that “the Word” was “with God.” Also, the Greek word the·osʹ occurs three times in verses 1 and 2. In the first and third occurrences, the·osʹ is preceded by the definite article in Greek; in the second occurrence, there is no article. Many scholars agree that the absence of the definite article before the second the·osʹ is significant. When the article is used in this context, the·osʹ refers to God Almighty. On the other hand, the absence of the article in this grammatical construction makes the·osʹ qualitative in meaning and describes a characteristic of “the Word.” Therefore, a number of Bible translations in English, French, and German render the text in a way similar to the New World Translation, conveying the idea that “the Word” was “a god; divine; a divine being; of divine kind; godlike.” Supporting this view, ancient translations of John’s Gospel into the Sahidic and the Bohairic dialects of the Coptic language, probably produced in the third and fourth centuries C.E., handle the first occurrence of the·osʹ at John 1:1 differently from the second occurrence. These renderings highlight a quality of “the Word,” that his nature was like that of God, but they do not equate him with his Father, the almighty God. In harmony with this verse, Colossians 2:9 describes Christ as having “all the fullness of the divine quality.” And according to 2 Peter 1:4, even Christ’s joint heirs would “become sharers in divine nature.” Additionally, in the Septuagint translation, the Greek word the·osʹ is the usual equivalent of the Hebrew words rendered “God,” ʼel and ʼelo·himʹ, which are thought to convey the basic meaning “Mighty One; Strong One.” These Hebrew words are used with reference to the almighty God, other gods, and humans. (See study note on John 10:34.) Calling the Word “a god,” or “a mighty one,” would be in line with the prophecy at Isaiah 9:6, foretelling that the Messiah would be called “Mighty God” (not “Almighty God”) and that he would be the “Eternal Father” of all those privileged to live as his subjects. The zeal of his own Father, “Jehovah of armies,” would accomplish this. - Isaiah 9:7.
From the material, you can see that all the members in heaven with the father are indeed, one family of God-like, or divine beings. So you are not very far off, but there are just a few areas that need adjusting, in order to fit scripture - like God being one, and not made up of more than one entity (Deuteronomy 6:4), and the Word not being eternal, and having a beginning (Colossians 1:15; Revelation 3:14).
Take care.
