“¹In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. ²The same was in the beginning with God. ³All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made… ¹⁴And the word was made 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 1:1-3, 14)

First, since my intended audience is Oneness believers who agree with me that the Trinity is not biblical, here is what I would ask if this verse (14) was being offered as a Trinitarian proof-text. Where does this verse explain, “God is a Trinity of three coequal persons in one substance”? It doesn’t, right? Since the passage does not provide the distinct details of the Trinity doctrine, that is all the evidence we need that this verse is used as a “proof-text” by Trinitarians to jump to a conclusion and then feel empowered by that to create a false dilemma. So, Trinitarians, in order to use John 1 as a proof-text, which they do, jump to conclusions, and create their false dilemma. So here is the…

TRINITARIAN’S FALSE DILEMMA: “this can ‘only’ mean that Jesus is ‘God the Son’ in contrast to ‘God the Father’ in the Trinity.”

This is how a Trinitarian would use John 1 as a “proof-text,” to justify their false dilemma, on which to base their Trinity doctrine, which they impose on the text (eisegesis), rather than gain from the text (exegesis) what it clearly and openly teaches in detail since this verse doesn’t say anything about a Trinity of persons or “one substance.” Isn’t that right?

On the same token, therefore, without applying double standards: Where does this verse explain, “Jesus is a dual-natured incarnation of the Father, his ‘deity’ is called ‘Father’ and his human flesh is called ‘son’, but he only has one identity, one personality, that operates in different ‘modes’”? It doesn’t say that, or anything like that, right? Since the passage does not provide the distinct details of the Oneness doctrine, that, again, is all the evidence we need that this verse is used as a “proof-text” by Onenessians to jump to a conclusion and then feel empowered by that to create a false dilemma. So, Onenessians, in order to use John 1 as a proof-text, which they do, jump to conclusions, and create their own false dilemma. So here is the…

ONENESSIAN’S FALSE DILEMMA: “this can ‘only’ mean that Jesus is an incarnation of the person of the Father”

This is how a Onenessian would use John 1 as a “proof-text” for their Oneness doctrine, which they impose on the text (eisegesis), rather than gain from the text (exegesis) what it clearly and openly teaches in detail since this verse doesn’t say anything about Jesus being an incarnation of the person of the Father or a mode of the Father or any specific details of the Oneness doctrine. Right? Be honest.

Trinitarians easily recognize that the Oneness doctrine is not spelled out in John 1. Likewise, Onenessians easily recognize that the Trinity doctrine is not spelled out in John 1. So why is it neither of them recognize that their own doctrine isn’t spelled out in John 1? That is called confirmation bias. For whatever reason, they see what they want to see in the passage, and therefore they each are completely sure the passage “proves” their different, unique, yet contradictory positions.

If both Trinitarians and Onenessians use the same method of interpretation, but simply arrive at different results, what makes the Oneness conclusion “better” or preferred over the Trinity conclusion? And why is it both just “coincidentally” resort to the method of interpretation that the devil uses, and indeed all false doctrines use, to arrive at their conclusions?

Proof Texted Scripture	False Dilemma “Concluded” from Proof Text	Scripture Negating the False Dilemma / Conclusion
John 1:1-3, 14 “…and the word was God… And the word was made flesh”	This can only mean that Jesus is God “incarnate” as a man.	John 14:10 “I speak not from myself.” See also (below) John 8:40; 7:16-18; 14:24; 8:26; 8:28; 8:38, 40; 8:54-55; 12:49-50; 17:7-8; 3:34-35; John 18:37; Hebrews 1:1-2; Acts 3:13–26; Deuteronomy 18:17-18; Acts 2:22-23; 13:16-41; John 17:3; Numbers 23:19, Acts 14:11

Recall that when the devil tempted Jesus, Jesus did NOT reply by giving a better interpretation of the proof text. Instead, he focused on the concept that the devil was “concluding”: the act of tempting God. That commandment to not tempt God had nothing directly to do with Psalm 91, but it had everything to do with hearing what God’s word said and commanded about what the devil was talking about.

So, let’s use Jesus’ method and see what Jesus explains about him being “the word” of God.

“But now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God.” (John 8:40)”

“¹⁶Jesus therefore answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. ¹⁷If anyone desires to do his will, he will know about the teaching, whether it is from God, or if I am speaking from myself. ¹⁸He who speaks from himself seeks his own glory, but he who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.” (John 7:16-18)

“…The words that I tell you, I speak not from myself; but the Father who lives in me does his works.” (John 14:10)

“The word (G3056 – logos) which you hear isn’t mine, but the Father’s who sent me.” (John 14:24)

“He who sent me is true; and the things which I heard from him, these I say…” (John 8:26)

“…I do nothing of myself; but as my Father taught me, I speak these things” (John 8:28).

“I say the things which I have seen with my Father; and you also do the things which you have seen with your father… But now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God. Abraham didn’t do this.” (John 8:38, 40)

“⁵⁴Jesus answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say that he is our God. ⁵⁵You have not known him, but I know him. If I said, ‘I don’t know him,’ I would be like you, a liar. But I know him, and keep his word.” (John 8:54-55)

“For I spoke not from myself, but the Father…>he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak… The things therefore which I speak, even as the Father has said to me, so I speak.” (John 12:49-50)

“Now…the words which you have given meI have given to them, and they received them…” (John 17:7-8)

“For he whom God has sent speaks the words of God…” (John 3:34-35)

Did Jesus in any of these passages or any other clearly explain that he was “God come to earth in the form of man”? No. Did he ever say, “I am the word incarnate” or anything like that? Again, no. Rather, Jesus himself clearly, constantly, and consistently denied that he was the “person” of God’s “word” but explained instead that he was a “man” who spoke God’s word. Jesus could not say such things if he was the person of God because it is written…

“…He cannot deny himself” (2 Timothy 2:13).

“Most assuredly, I tell you, the Son can do nothing of himself…” (John 5:19).

“I can of myself do nothing” (John 5:30).

So, by using Jesus’ method of interpretation that he taught by example in Matthew 4:5-7, we can rule out that John 1:1-3, 14 is saying Jesus is the “person” of the word “incarnate” because that jumped-to conclusion is contradicted by what Jesus explained of himself in many, many places, just like how “you shall not tempt the Lord” ruled out the devil’s conclusion concerning Psalm 91.

Two Foundations

Since neither of their doctrines are spelled out and explained in the Bible, what if both Trinitarians and Onenessians are starting off with a pagan view of God and interpreting the Bible through that lens rather than starting with a biblically stated and explained foundation and interpreting the Bible through that lens? Here are the two “foundations” I’m referring to:

Biblical Foundation (#1)

“²²Men of Israel, hear these words! Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved by God to you by mighty works and wonders and signs which God did by him in the midst of you, even as you yourselves know, ²³him, being delivered up by the determined counsel and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by the hand of lawless men, crucified and killed; ²⁴whom God raised up, having freed him from the agony of death, because it was not possible that he should be held by it…” (Acts 2:22-36)

Or

Pagan Foundation (#2)

“…The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men!” (Acts 14:11)

With this question in mind, let’s return to John’s prologue and see if we can’t determine which “foundation” is the better one to use to understand the passage:

“¹In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. ²The same was in the beginning with God. ³All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made… ¹⁴And the word was made 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 1:1-3, 14)

Agreeably, this passage is not very clear. In this passage word simply means word, it does not mean a preexistent person named “word.” “Word” (logos in Greek) is not a “code word” for the second person in the Trinity, like pagans and Gnostics believed who both did have a deity named logos.

What we know from the Bible is that when God spoke, creation came into being. This passage is a lot like Psalm 91, where it looks like you could “jump to the conclusion” that God himself became a man. But that is not what it says. There is nothing in this passage that articulates, or teaches, or spells out or explains the distinctives of Oneness or Trinity or various other views.

To the contrary, as we have seen, Jesus’ explanations of himself do not either state or support a foundation of him as “god come to earth in the form of man” (Acts 14:11). So, to understand this passage, we need to interpret it through things Jesus did explain.

And we need to understand it through the other foundation, Acts 2:22-36. Did Jesus support that foundation instead of the idea of “gods come to earth in the form of man”? Yes, he did.

“But now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God. Abraham didn’t do this.” (John 8:40)

“Pilate therefore said to him, “Are you a king then?” Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. For this reason I have been born, and for this reason I have come into the world, that I should testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.” (John 18:37)

Other scriptures explain this same thing, that Jesus was a human being that spoke the words of God, not “a god named logos come to earth as a man”:

“¹In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, ²but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.” (Hebrews 1:1-2)

Imagine what that verse would look like if, as Trinitarians and Onenessians contend, “word” is a “code word” for the incarnated son? Here’s how that would read:

“¹In the past God’s Word Jesus spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, ²BUT in these last days God’s word Jesus has spoken to us by God’s WORD Jesus, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.” (Hebrews 1:1-2)

Do you see how nonsensical that makes the passage? Hebrews 1:1-2 is saying something different than Incarnationists conclude about John 1. So no, “word” is not a “code word” for Jesus, the son of God, being the “person” of God. Rather, it is a way of speaking of Jesus as the anointed speaker for God. In fact, this passage is contrasting Jesus to the word that God spoke “to” the prophets, not identifying Jesus “as” the word who spoke to the prophets. So, the “incarnation” view, rather than having faith that comes from hearing the word, negates a biblically stated contrast.

There are other scriptures that are contradicted if we attempt to conclude that Jesus was “god come to earth in the form of men.”

For example,

“For most assuredly, not to angels does he give help, but he gives help to the seed of Abraham. Therefore he was obligated in all things to be made like his brothers, that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make atonement for the sins of the people. For in that he himself has suffered being tempted, he is able to help those who are tempted.” (Hebrews 2:16–18)

“¹³The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified His Servant Jesus, whom you delivered up, and denied… ¹⁵whom God raised from the dead, to which we are witnesses…

¹⁸…the things which God announced by the mouth of all His prophets, that Christ should suffer, He thus fulfilled… ²²For Moses indeed said to the fathers, ‘The Lord God will raise up a prophet for you from among your brothers, like me. You shall listen to him in all things whatever he says to you. ²³It will be, that every soul that will not listen to that prophet will be utterly destroyed from among the people.’ … ²⁶God, having raised up His servant, Jesus, sent him to you first, to bless you, in turning away everyone of you from your wickedness. (Acts 3:13–26)

“You shall listen to him,” there’s that concept of “word” again. Recall what God told Moses:

“¹⁷Yahweh said to me, “They have well said that which they have spoken. ¹⁸I will raise them up a prophet from among their brothers, like you; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him.” (Deuteronomy 18:17-18)

Which is exactly what Jesus did testify to:

“For I spoke not from myself, but the Father…he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak… The things therefore which I speak, even as the Father has said to me, so I speak.” (John 12:49-50)

So, God’s word, that He spoke to Moses, really did become flesh, just not in the sense that Incarnationists jump to conclude!

Now, compare these verses and notice the harmony between them:

“And the word was made flesh, and dwelt among us…” (John 1:14)

“…the things which God announced… He thus fulfilled…” (Acts 3:18)

Which doesn’t mean: “The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men!” (Acts 14:11)

Rather, it means,

“²²…hear these words! Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved by God to you by mighty works and wonders and signs which God did by him in the midst of you, even as you yourselves know, ²³him, being delivered up by the determined counsel and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by the hand of lawless men, crucified and killed” (Acts 2:22-23)

Can you do that to explain the distinct elements of Oneness or Trinity? Can you use verbatim quoted scriptures to explain the specific elements of either Oneness or Trinity? Give it a try. Better yet, listen to what the apostles did preach Jesus to be.

Paul proclaimed (preached) the same thing for salvation:

“¹⁶Paul stood up, motioned with his hand, and began to speak: ‘Men of Israel and you Gentiles who fear God, listen to me! ¹⁷The God of the people of Israel chose our fathers. He made them into a great people…

²¹Then the people asked for a king… ²²After removing Saul, He raised up David as their king and testified about him: ‘I have found David son of Jesse a man after My own heart

²³From the descendants of this man, God has brought to Israel the Savior Jesus, as He promised…

²⁶Brothers, children of Abraham, and you Gentiles who fear God, it is to us that this message of salvation has been sent. ²⁷The people of Jerusalem and their rulers did not recognize Jesus, yet in condemning Him they fulfilled the words of the prophets that are read every Sabbath. ²⁸And though they found no ground for a death sentence, they asked Pilate to have Him executed.

²⁹When they had carried out all that was written about Him, they took Him down from the tree and laid Him in a tomb. ³⁰But God raised Him from the dead, ³¹and for many days He appeared to those who had accompanied Him from Galilee to Jerusalem. They are now His witnesses to our people.

³²And now we proclaim to you the good news: What God promised our fathers ³³He has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm:

‘You are My Son; today I have become Your Father.’

³⁴In fact, God raised Him from the dead never to see decay. As He has said:

‘I will give you the holy and sure blessings I promised to David.’

³⁵So also, He says in another Psalm:

‘You will not let your holy one see decay.’

³⁶For when David had served God’s purpose in his own generation, he fell asleep. His body was buried with his fathers and saw decay. ³⁷But the One whom God raised from the dead did not see decay.

³⁸Therefore let it be known to you, brothers, that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. ³⁹Through Him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses. ⁴⁰Watch out, then, that what was spoken by the prophets does not happen to you: ⁴¹‘Look, you scoffers, wonder and perish! For I am doing a work in your days that you would never believe, even if someone told you.’” (Acts 13:16-41)

This passage is a clear and concise explanation of Jesus. No commentary needed other than to point out what it does not say. Nowhere here are the distinct elements of either Oneness or Trinity expressed or explained.

And this is why Jesus himself said,

“³This is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and him whom you sent, Jesus Christ.” (John 17:3)

 Print This Post