Why is Jesus called the Word, the Logos of God?

[MissKate13]

Why is Jesus called the Word (Logos) of God?

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)

He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. (Rev. 19:13)

************************************
The short answer to the OP question would be because Jesus was the embodiment of God’s message to us.

If I speak a word, that word is a part of me, is it not? If I respond to a post from you, you associate that post with me. They are my words. You cannot separate me from my words. They are an “exact representation” of me. Yes, you are reading them from a phone or computer screen, but those words belong to me. I am in control of them and responsible for them.

It is no different than the relationship between God the Father, and His Son, Jesus, the Word. The words Jesus spoke were from the Father (John 12:49). Jesus was the embodiment of the words spoken by the Father, the Father’s words in the physical body of Jesus.

Just as I cannot separate my words from me, Jesus, the Word of God, could not be separated from the Father. Just as I can send my words out in a forum post, the Father sent His words out in the body of Jesus.

This is why Jesus would say “I and the Father are one” John 10:30). It is why he could say “…You, the Father, are in Me, and I am in You” (John 17:21). It is why Jesus would say, “…Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father…” (John 14:9). And why He would say, “For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me” (John 6:38)

This is why I believe the Father is YHWH, the Son is YHWH, and the Holy Spirit is YHWH. Each has a role. The Father is greater in position. He controls both the Son and the Spirit, who is the power behind the words of the Father.

Why did Jesus pray to the Father? Why did he submit to the Father’s will? The answer is simple. The Father was in control of His Word, just as we are in control of our words.

The Father, His Word (the logos) and His Spirit have always existed as the ONE and only true YHWH! They cannot be separated!

[onewithhim]

Jesus is called "the Word" because he has been God's spokesman throughout the centuries. It was undoubtedly he who was in the pillar of fire and the pillar of smoke when leading Israel out of Egypt, and before that in the burning bush where Moses was told to go back to Egypt. Wherever it says that Jehovah came down here, it was probably Jesus representing Jehovah. There were two angels who represented Jehovah when visiting Lot, and I think three who visited Abraham. One was called "Jehovah," but that is because this angel represented Jehovah. It could have been Jesus. We know that Jehovah could never be contained on this planet, for he is the Creator of everything. He has sent his representatives to deal with humans. Jesus is His foremost representative.

[MissKate13]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #2]
Your first sentence answered the OP question, then you went off topic. Did you read the entire OP? It would be helpful if you responded to it.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #2]
Your first sentence answered the OP question, then you went off topic. Did you read the entire OP? It would be helpful if you responded to it.

I read your entire OP, and I see where you contradicted yourself throughout. You talk about the three Gods and yet you say that Jesus IS YHWH. You can't have it two ways here. The Father is either one Person or not. The Son is one other Person or not. They ARE two individuals, and therefore Jesus cannot be YHWH.

[MissKate13]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #4]

Again, you do not address what I posted about the word. You answered the topic question but ignored all of the points I made in my OP. Instead, you redirect. What you wrote in your post has nothing to do with the OP.

[Miles]

Why is Jesus called the Word (Logos) of God?

As Don Stewart* says:

This Term Is Not Defined

Although there is no explanation given in Scripture as to why Jesus is called the Word of God there have been several suggested reasons.

For his reasons see HERE

* "Don Stewart has written over twenty books on the subject of evidences for the Christian faith. These include, The Basic Bible Study Series, You Be the Judge, 10 Reasons To Trust the Bible, and The Coming Temple. In the last fifteen years, he has spoken in over thirty countries proclaiming the message that the Christian faith is both reasonable and intelligent."
source: same as above, The Blue Letter Bible.

.

[JehovahsWitness]

WHY IS JESUS CALLED THE LOGOS?


I would say Jesus is called "The Word" because he is the intelligent person (individual created being) that tell others what somebody else (ie a different individual) namely YHWH the Father of all (Jehovah) Jesus' creator /Father, wants others to know.


Here is a sketch to make it simple...



In short ... Jesus is called THE WORD* because he is the messenger or spokesman of his Father.


* NOTE : Jesus isnt literally a WORD because a word is a piece of information and not an intelligent individual with his own will and personality. Its just a name (For example is someone named their daughter APRIL it doesn't mean they are literally a month of the year



RELATED POSTS

Is THE WORD a figure of speech?
viewtopic.php?p=1018169#p1018169

Emmanuel : Does Jesus theophoric name make him equal to Almighty God?
viewtopic.php?p=1112508#p1112508

In what sense is Jesus "The last Adam:?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 50#p959850

Is Jesus the YHWH of the "old testament"?
viewtopic.php?p=872828#p872828

Why is Jesus called the "only-begotten" son of God?
viewtopic.php?p=1090278#p1090278

Is JESUS MICHAEL the archangel?
viewtopic.php?p=780486#p780486

[JehovahsWitness]

viewtopic.php?p=1112352#p1112352

HOW SHOULD JOHN 1 VERSE 1 PROPERLY BE TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH?

Put very simply, John explains in that someone called "The Word" (logos) was with God. He uses the definite article "THE" (Greek "HO" ) when talking about the later. So he says The Word was with THE God (ho theos) . But then John turns his attention to The Word (in Greek : "logos") , he says this one (The Word) "was God". Interestingly, this time he does not used the definite article.

So there is a difference in the original text between the how first GOD (theos) appears and the second. ( For more on the definite article used for God see the following WORD STUDY: http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... 11c-a.html
viewtopic.php?p=849585#p849585).

Bible scholar Philip B. Harner points out that in "... these cases the English reader might not understand exactly what John was trying to express" but here is where a knowledge of the basic Greek comes in. In Greek in John 1: 1c (speaking about The Word) we have what is called a singular anarthrous predicate noun preceding the verb, this construction points to a quality about someone.

One might think of the famous Oscar Wilde play "THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING EARNEST" which is a play on words of the adjective "earnest," meaning honest or sincere, and the German boy's name "Ernest". Although in English the two words are pronounced the same, Ernest identifies the individual while "earnst" tells us something about his character or behaviour. So the sentence "Ernest was earnest" may sound the same but the two words have completely different functions

In very simple terms, the second time "god" (theos) apears its acting like an adjective, its telling us what this person was like rather than who he is. We do something similar in English when we might say of someone : "She's an angel". Again we are not identfying what she is (a winged supernatural creature) but how she behaves. We say "She is an angel" we MEAN she is a very good, kind person; she is like an angel. She has an angelic nature As Harner explains, the clause could be translated, "the Word had the same nature as God." - "Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns Mark 15:39 and John 1:1", Philip B. Harner, (Journal of Biblical Literature, March 1973), 92:75-87. (For more considerations of an unmodified "theos" without the article see the following WORD STUDY : http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... er_21.html)

ADDING AN "A"

So how can the translator help the English reader understand the difference between the two appearances of the word GOD? How can the English properly reflect the Greek meaning that the 2nd apearance of the word "God" (theos) was speaking about qualities rather than identity? More Greek anyone?

There are many cases of a singular anarthrous predicate noun preceding the verb in scripture, such as in Mk 6:49; 11:32; Joh 4:19; 6:70; 8:44; 9:17; 10:1, 13, 33; 12:6. In these places translators insert the indefinite article before the predicate noun in order to bring out the quality or characteristic of the subject. Since the indefinite article is inserted before the predicate noun in such texts, with equal justification the indefinite article [ a ] is inserted before the anarthrous‚ in the predicate of John 1:1 to make it read ... "a god" ( For more on the adding of an indefinite article see the folowing WORD STUDY http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... er_21.html
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 29#p924329)

So by adding the indefinite article : "a"/ an , (and for some translators, using a lower case 'g' ) the translator can signal to the English reader what is evident in the Greek, while still using the English word " god " (theos), namely ... that "The word " was "godlike", of a "divine" nature. For more on this : viewtopic.php?p=1108708#p1108708







FURTHER READING

http://onlytruegod.org/defense/john1files.htm
http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... 11c-a.html
https://fosterheologicalreflections.blo ... gress.html

Does "Colwell's Rule" shed light on how John1:1 should properly be translated?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 38#p822838
http://onlytruegod.org/defense/metzgercolwell.htm
http://fosterheologicalreflections.blog ... n-11c.html

RELATED POSTS

Is it true that one cannot use an indefinite article with a predicate nominative in Greek?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 78#p822778

What is the literal Greek meaning of John 1:1c according to biblical scholars?
viewtopic.php?p=1111946#p1111946

JOHN 1:1 The word was "divine"
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 96#p870896

Is The New Word translation the ONLY bible that has rendered John 1:1c " . ... and the word was a god"?
viewtopic.php?p=1111348#p1111348

Is The New World Translation a literal translation?
viewtopic.php?p=1112080#p1112080

To learn more please go to to other posts related to ...

JESUS , , THE "TRINITY TEXTS" DEBUNKED and ... BIBLE TRANSLATIONS

[JehovahsWitness]

This is why Jesus would say “I and the Father are one” John 10:30).


WHAT DID JESUS MEAN THAT HE AND HIS FATHER WERE ONE?[/b]



Jesus could not here have intended to say that he was literally "one God" with the Father since , according to the Catholic NAB translation, he went on to pray regarding his disciples

NEW AMERICAN BIBLE

Verse 21: so that they [Jesus disciples] may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me.

Verse 22: And I have given them the glory you gave me, so that they may be one, as we are one

source : https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PXP.HTM

In the gospel account which describes Jesus conversation on the passover night, the same Greek word [hen] is used for "one" with God is also used for "one" with his disciples. Obviously this could not mean Jesus disciples were Almighty God and part of a trinity!

Young's Concise Critical Bible Commentary p. 62, Baker Book House, 1977 states:

The particle en [hen] being of the neuter gender, can hardly signify one being, i.e. one God, but rather one in will, purpose, counsel...

JW




FURTHER READING
http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... -1030.html


RELATED POSTS

John 10:30: What did Jesus mean by My father and I are one?
viewtopic.php?p=1112220#p1112220

John 20:28: What did Thomas mean when he said ... My Lord and my God!"?
viewtopic.php?p=1112104#p1112104

Mark 2:5-7 : Did Jesus need to be Almighty God to forgive sins?
viewtopic.php?p=1112515#p1112515

How many Only True Godss exist?
viewtopic.php?p=1114357#p1114357

How should John 1:1 be properly translated?
viewtopic.php?p=1112024#p1112024

Is Jesus YHWH? (Eloi)
viewtopic.php?p=1112299#p1112299

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

JESUS CHRIST , PRE-HUMAN EXISTENCE and ... CONCEPTION & BIRTH

[JehovahsWitness]

It is why Jesus would say, “…Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father…” (John 14:9).



WHAT DID JESUS MEAN WHEN HE SAID "IF YOU HAVE SEEN ME YOU HAVE SEEN THE FATHER" [JOHN 14:8] ?

JOHN 14 : 8, 9

Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

I "SEE" WHAT YOU MEAN

The words used in John 14:7 which are translated as "seen" are a form of the NT Greek word horao. Notice the relationship between "know" and "see": 3 John 11 - "the one who does good is of God; the one who does evil has not seen [horao] God." And at 1 John 3:6 "No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has seen [horao] Him or knows Him." - NASB.


BIBLICAL DICTIONARIES

"[Horao" means ] ... become aware (Gen. 37:1). (b) figuratively it comes to be used of intellectual or spiritual perception .... It also means ... attend to, know or have experienced (Deut. 11:2), or be concerned about something (Gen. 37:14; Is. 5:12)." [ ... ] "Besides the general meaning of to know, horao and its derivatives can mean to obtain knowledge". - The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Vol. 3, 1986 printing, Zondervan, pp. 513, 515, 518

Professor Joseph H. Thayer , the dean of New Testament scholars in America, tells us that John 14:7, 9 is in the category of "2. to see with the mind, to perceive, to KNOW." - Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament

Thus it is clear that the Greek word in the account horao ("see") can mean the same thing as "abiding in" or "knowing," and have the figurative meaning of agreement in purpose and will with someone else. Note the following commentary:

"... Statements that human beings have seen or will see God Himself do not refer to a perception of a physical aspect of God by human physical senses but a process of coming to some amount of understanding of God, often just a simple realization of His greatness or some other aspect of His nature, either by a revelatory vision (Isa. 6:15; Ezk. 1:26-28), or by their acquaintance with Jesus Christ (Jn 14:9, cf. 1:18)."“ Eerdmans, 1991. - The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, vol. 4, p. 380

CONCLUSION There is no real reason to insist that John 14:7, 9 shows Jesus as being equally God with his Father. Rather that understanding what he did and said was like knowing ("seeing") Jesus is totally in harmony with ("one" with) the Father in purpose so that we can "see" the Father's will in Jesus.



RELATED POSTS

John 10:30: What did Jesus mean by My father and I are one?
viewtopic.php?p=1112118#p1112118

How should John 1:1 be properly translated?
viewtopic.php?p=1112024#p1112024

John 14: 8, 9 What did Jesus mean if you have seen me you have seen the Father?
viewtopic.php?p=1112259#p1112259

How should Zechariah 12:10 be properly translated?
viewtopic.php?p=1112224#p1112224

How do various TRANSLATIONS render Zechariah 12:10 ?
viewtopic.php?p=1112233#p1112233

Was Jesus declaring himself to be YAWEH at John 8:58?
viewtopic.php?p=1112263#p1112263

To learn more please go to to other posts related to ...

JESUS , , THE "TRINITY TEXTS" DEBUNKED and ... BIBLE TRANSLATIONS