Featured Understanding John 1:14

Yet another subject change question from a Calvinist set on derailing discussion of John 1:14

 

Yet another off topic question to change the subject from John 1:14. Note none of these derailers post their own understanding of the verse.

 

What is Christ's uniquely divine status? Surprise us, answer a question with a statement.

 

Returning to topic:
The next phrase (of the only Son from the Father) contains several controversial words which I believe must be dealt with collectively.

Of the only Son is the NASB translation of monogenes, and could better be translated as uniquely divine Son.

From (Greek para) might better be translated as "sent from" indicating God incarnate was sent by the Father. Putting the phrase together we get, "the uniquely divine Son sent from the Father.

John 1:14 (NASB)
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us; and we saw His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

John 1:14 (interpretative translation)
And Logos (the Second Person of the Trinity) became human (God incarnate), and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory (glory as the Son of God, the Lamb of God, the Christ, Messiah and Savior, the image of God and as the Good Shepherd, caring for and nurturing His sheep) as the uniquely divine Son sent from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Grace is not a substance like gravy, to be ladled upon a person, but a attribute of love given to those chosen by the giver not because of any meritorious attribute of the receiver, but according to the gracious choice of the giver. Often the bestowal of divine favor or blessing as an unmerited gift.

Truth refers to what has fidelity to the original, thus because Christ is the perfect image of God, He is the Truth. Thus John 1:14 teaches Jesus as God incarnate's mission was to bestow God's indescribable gift and provide revelation of that gift.​

 

More non-germane obfuscation. What is Christ's uniquely divine status? Surprise us, answer a question with a statement.

 

Do you never tire of misrepresenting my view? Here is what I said:

You see, or perhaps don't, translators evaluate the context and choose the word that best conveys the intended message from the pallet of historically available word meanings.​

And here is what you falsely claimed:

But what you clearly do not understand is that their translation choices are not based on what makes it more clear to them... It is what conveys the meaning of the text.​

Since several verses say Jesus was sent from the Father, the choice is contextually correct and avoids errant views.

Did I "claiming to know things about God when you've already stated before that you know nothing about Greek?" Nope, I cited a published source and you said taint so without a shred of posted support.

Last point. Archangel said, "You're too concerned with wanting to be right, but you haven't done the work to actually be right." His claim that the Greek "para" cannot be translated as "sent from" because of Greek grammar is total fiction. Published translations in English render "para" as "sent from!"

 

Now this poster claims Jesus is not eternal!!! Just another banal effort at obfuscation.

 

Consider Mark 14:43 where the Chief Priests had sent Judas. Here we find "para" translated as "sent from" or "sent by" in several published English translations, apparently according to this self declared expert, lacking the Greek grammar knowledge to know "para" cannot be translated as "sent from or sent by!!" The list includes the NET and Dr. Dan Wallace.

 

John 1:14 (interpretative translation)
And Logos (the Second Person of the Trinity) became human (God incarnate), and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory (glory as the Son of God, the Lamb of God, the Christ, Messiah and Savior, the image of God and as the Good Shepherd, caring for and nurturing His sheep) as the uniquely divine Son sent from the Father, full of grace and truth.

1) Did anyone claim Logos is not the Second Person of the Trinity?
2) Did anyone claim became flesh does not mean became 100% human?
3) Did anyone claim the glory of Jesus is not as "the Son of God, the Lamb of God, the Christ, Messiah and Savior, the image of God, and as the Good Shepherd, caring for and nurturing His sheep?
4) Yes some claimed being "monogenes" did not mean being "uniquely divine as God incarnate. But they were wrong.
5) Yes, one self proclaimed Greek grammar expert indicated the Greek preposition "para" could not be translated as "sent from!" But he was wrong according to several published translations which render "para" as sent from or sent by.