The Meaning of λόγος in John 1:1

The Greek word logos, as ''word'', refers to expression from the inside out. 

When one uses ''reason'' (i.e. logos), these two are involved [1]: 

logos endiathetos - the word within the mind (i.e. thoughts)

logos prophorikos - the thoughts expressed out as letters (word) or speech (words). 

When one uses reason (the human ability to think in an intelligent way, make sensible decisions, etc. [2]), one is ''thinking'' (forming thoughts) in his mind. And when one shares his ideas/thoughts to others, he says/utters (forming words) them from his mouth. 

When translating the Greek phrase ''ho logos'' of John 1:1, 1:14 into English, it should be treated as a proper noun: (''the Logos'', not ''the logos'' or ''the Word'', not ''the word'') because it refers to the name of a person [3].

John only used the Greek word logos by itself. in John 1:1, 1:14. The apostle did not use either the Greek phrase logos endiathetos (thoughts) or logos prophorikos (word). It's highly likely that John intends to utilise both of its meanings. 

The logos is word (thoughts expressed out) but the logos still exists even if it is not expressed out (thoughts). This means that the logos always exists. It's just impossible not to. There was never a time when God was without his logos. Thus, to identify Jesus as the Logos means that there was never a time when Jesus did not exist. The gospel of John did affirm quite repeatedly that the divine Jesus has always existed (John 1:1, 1:2, 1:18, 8:58, 16:32, 17:5).This is the significance of using Logos as a title of Jesus in the Prologue.

The Logos was with God John 1:1b

In the bosom of the Father John 1:18c

Jesus as the Logos was so near to God (reclining in God's own bosom, or chest). This shows Jesus as the Logos has a close relationship with God. In John 13:23-24, Peter asked John (who was reclining in the bosom of Jesus) about who was Jesus talking about, because he (Peter) thought that John, who was in a very close proximity to Jesus, heard what Jesus said.  

Majority of English Bibles translates logos as into English as logos prophorikos (''word'') in John 1:1, 1:14. 

John used a chiastic structure (to highlight or emphasise that Jesus was "God" (θεος) in the very beginning of his gospel. This showed that he deemed the Logos as a heavenly being/divine being, and not human being. 

No one has ever heard the voice of God (John 5:37) just as no one has ever seen God (John 1:18). Mortals cannot see God and does not hear directly from God in his dwelling place (which is unapproachable). God can only be seen and heard by mortals through intermediaries, like the angels, prophets and the Lord Jesus Christ. John 5:36 God cannot be seen by mortals is consistent with John 1:18 (no one has ever seen God).

1 Timothy 6:16

New Revised Standard Version

16 It is he alone who has immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see; to him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen.

No one can see him and live (Exodus 33:20). Any mortal will instantly be killed once he/she tries to see the Lord God. Jesus had seen God (John 6:46) and shared glory (i.e. brightness) with God before creation (John 17:5). This brightness was God and Jesus dwelling in an unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see (1 Timothy 6:16).

When the Word became flesh, (John 1:14), he was manifest in flesh (1 Timothy 3:16) and was seen, heard and touched (1 John 1:1-3).

In the Old Testament, the word (logos) of God came to the prophets and these prophets share what they heard from God to the people [4]. John 10:35 speaks of the word (logos) of God which came to the gods (i.e. angels) in Psalm 82:6.

"and the word of the Lord came to Micah"

καὶ ἐγένετο λόγος κυρίου πρὸς Μιχαιαν (Micah 1:1 LXX)
"and the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel"
καὶ ἐγένετο λόγος κυρίου πρὸς Ιεζεκιηλ (Ezekiel 1:3LXX)
" and the word of the Lord came to Zechariah"                                                                    καὶ ἐγένετο λόγος κυρίου πρὸς Ζαχαριαν (Zachariah 7:8 LXX)

Angels can hear the voice of the Lord (Psalm 103:20, John 10:35) and the angels will share the word (i.e. message) of the Lord to mortals. The Greek word anggelos itself means ''messenger''.

Luke 1:19

New Revised Standard Version

19 The angel replied, “I am Gabriel. I stand in the presence of God, and I have been sent to speak to you and to bring you this good news.

It was not God the Father in heaven who spoke to Moses. According to Acts 7, Jesus was the Lord (functioning as an angel/messenger) who appeared to Moses and spoke to him:

Acts 7:30-33, 7:59-60 (NRSV): “Now when forty years had passed, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in the flame of a burning bush. 31 When Moses saw it, he was amazed at the sight; and as he approached to look, there came the voice of the Lord: 32 ‘I am the God of your ancestors, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.’ Moses began to tremble and did not dare to look. 33 Then the Lord said to him, ‘Take off the sandals from your feet, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.  59 While they were stoning Stephen, he prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 60 Then he knelt down and cried out in a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he died.''

Jesus as the Word (of God) means Jesus is how God speaks his mind. Jesus hears from God and Jesus relays what he heard to others (John 5:30, 8:38, 12:49). Jesus is the Logos because God communicates to us through Jesus, not through literal speech. In other words, Jesus as ''the Word'' functions as God's ''spokeperson'', a function which is also carried by prophets and angels.

The Personified Logos in the Old Testament

In the 3rd century B.C.E., the logos was personified in the Septuagint: 

His Logos will run swiftly ( ἕως τάχους δραμεῖται ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ Psalm 147:15 LXX)

Your Almighty Logos leaped down from heaven out of thy royal throne, as a fierce man of war into the midst of a land of destruction, (ὁ παντοδύναμός σου λόγος ἀπ’ οὐρανῶν ἐκ θρόνων βασιλείων ἀπότομος πολεμιστὴς εἰς μέσον τῆς ὀλεθρίας ἥλατο γῆς ξίφος ὀξὺ τὴν ἀνυπόκριτον ἐπιταγήν σου φέρων. Wisdom 18:15 LXX)

The logos is god in the third century B.C.E.

In ancient Greece, Athens (circa 300 B.C.E.), Greek Stoic philosophers said that the "logos was god". However, they deemed the logos to be also nature. Hence, Stoicism is pantheistic. 

"For the Stoics, logos was equally reason (individual and universal), nature, and God, while for Philo, logos is not ultimate reality but merely what we can see and understand of God, who is Himself very far from human comprehension. In Stoicism, logos is God; in Philo it corresponds to his specific doctrine of the dunameis, the powers of God who created the world and governs it (Philo of Alexandria, 3.2 Stoicism, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2018).

For John, the logos was also god (John 1:1c) but that his logos was a personal god, not impersonal like that of the Stoics. The logos was "with God", repeated by John twice in his prologue (John 1:1, 1:2). John taught that the logos was a unique God (μονογενης θεος) different from all the other gods (cf. John 1:18, 10:34-35, Psalm 82:6). 

The logos is god in the first century A.D. 

In the 1st century A.D., Philo of Alexandria (c. A.D. 50) called the Logos "God" (θεος) [4]). The gospel of John was written in this time period (c. A.D. 90) and also called the Logos ''God" (θεος) (John 1:1c). This logos christology persisted in the next century. Justin Martyr (c. A.D. 100-160) spoke of Jesus as the other God, next to the first God, the Father, who has no God above him [5]).

Notes

[1] ''Stoic psychology emphasized the lack of coincidence between the reasoning power, which rests within, and language, which gives outward expression to the powers of reason. Since the same word logos was used to designate both the power of reasoning and reason as expressed in speech, the difference came to be stated as a difference between two logoi. One might no less properly express this as a distinction between two types or states of language. A language within, or an inner language (logos endiathetos ), is then distinguished from a language that we have in common with talking birds, a language expressed in speech (logos prophorikos).'' (https://www.encyclopedia.com/philosophy-and-religion/philosophy/philosophy-terms-and-concepts/logos).

[2] https://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/dictionary/american/reason_1

[3] The logos per se is not a person. However, logos is a name for Jesus both in John 1:1, 1:14 in the same exact way in Revelation 19:13.

Also, if θεος is interpreted in its general sense (i.e. god), it shows that ho logos (the subject in John 1:1) was a name/title for a person who is being called θεος.

• Moses was god (θεος) (Exodus 7:1).
• ...they thought that Paul was a god (θεος) (Acts 28:6)
• The Word was God (θεος) (John 1:1).

[4] Philo of Alexandria (c. A.D. 50) calls the Logos "second god [deuteros theos]" (Questions and Answers on Genesis 2:62). 

[5] ''Justin: I shall attempt to persuade you, since you have understood the Scriptures, [of the truth] of what I say, that there is, and that there is said to be, another God and Lord subject to the Maker of all things; who is also called an Angel, because He announces to men whatsoever the Maker of all things— above whom there is no other God — wishes to announce to them.'' (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapters 56)

The Origin of the English word ''god/God''

The English word “god” came from German “gott” which came from Proto-Germanic “guda” which came from Proto-Indo-European “ghutos” (“ghew” - pour/libate + “tos”). Thus, etymologically speaking “god” refers to a liquid offering being poured probably onto a dead body (as in a religious ritual expressing belief in the after life /ancestor worship ). Later, when the concept of personal gods occurred, instead of calling the offerings “god”, they called the divine person who receives the offerings “god”.

Both the Greek word theos and English word god does not originally refer to a personal deity but to either a holy place or the offering itself. These things (sacred place and offerings) are both associated with the concept of personal deities. However, according to history, the most primitive religious belief is Animism ( the belief that all physical things are alive because they have spirit in them) and the belief that the soul or spirit (life force) does not die so that ancestral worship (honouring dead humans ) was the first ever religious worship in history. This explains why burial rituals were the first religious activities. The concept of personal deities came much later.

The lack of personal deities in the most ancient human societies explains why “god” in its etymology does not have the meaning of “a personal god”. “god” in its original and most ancient sense is about a holy place (burial site) or the offering (burial ritual) made to honour dead human bodies due to the belief that they are not really dead but are continually alive in their souls. This belief in immortal souls is because of the universal belief in “Animism” that every physical thing (trees, stones, human bodies, water, mountain etc.) are all alive because they all have spirits.

Summary

The English word “god” (proto-Indo-European “ghutos”) originally refers to the (liquid) offerings being poured onto the dead in burial practises. When the concept of personal deities arose, they re-use and  applied the word to divine persons. “god” in the language of Babylonians originally refers to a “priest”. “god” in the language of the Akkadians, Arabic , Aramaic and Latin were all originally referring to the “sky” or “heaven”. When people started to worship celestial objects (sun, moon and stars - all are found “in the sky” or “heaven”) and began treating them as persons, they simply called them “gods” which means that the personal deities are called “gods” simply because they are recognised as persons whose dwelling place is in the sky (heaven).

All things subjected to the Son - 1 Corinthians 15:27-28

1 Corinthians 15:27-28

New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

27 For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is plain that this does not include the one who put all things in subjection under him. 28 When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to the one who put all things in subjection under him, so that God may be all in all.

According to the text and its context: 

1. Christ was not always subject to God according to verse 28.
2. When will the Son subject himself to God in 1 Cor 15:28?
3. When "all things" (all creatures except God) will be subjected to the Son, then, the Son will subject himself to God. This shows that God and Christ are equal because they are not part of "all things" which are subjected to them.

The Christ-Hymn of Philippians 2

Philippians 2:6-7 in both grammar and context affirms that Jesus is already equal with God first in v, 6 and then became not equal in v, 7 because of ''taking the form of a slave''. In v. 9-11, Jesus became equal again with God as Lord.

 

Jesus is God in John 20:28

Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28 NRSV)

Jesus is God in John 20:28 based on grammar: 

Grammatically speaking, Jesus is being addressed as both Lord and God by Thomas in John 20:28. 

(1) ho kurios mou kai o theos mou (the Lord of me and the God of me) is an unsual Greek grammatical structure known as ''Hebraism''. In this syntax, both the nominatives o kurios (the Lord) and o theos (the God) refers to the same person being addressed.The exact same Hebraism is found in Psalm 35:23 of the Greek Septuagint with only the nominatives in juxtaposition here (ho theos mou kai ho kyrios mou - the God of me and the Lord of me). 

(2) Jesus is explicitly the only one being addressed in John 20:28 as evident in another Hebraism ''and he answered and said unto him'' [autos]. The antecedent of the pronoun here refers to Iesous (Jesus) alone. 

John 14:9 says that seeing Jesus is seeing the Father (see also John 12:45). 

This is entirely different from saying ''my God'' to Jesus in John 20:28. Thomas was not addressing the Father in John 20:28. Thomas did not say ''my God'' to the Father in John 20:28. The author explicitly writes the pronoun αὐτῷ which in context has Jesus (not the Father) as the antecedent. 

Jesus is God in John 20:28 based on context: 

(1) John 20:22 supports John 20:28. In John 20:22, John applies to Jesus the same Greek word as well as the same action YHWH did in Genesis 2:7 (LXX) to Jesus. 

Jesus is the same God who breathed on man in Genesis 2:7 as evident in the Greek texts:

The Greek word ἐνεφύσησεν (breathed on) occurred only once in the Old Testament in Genesis 2:7. In this verse, ὁ θεὸς (the God) breathed on [the nostrils of the man]. 

The Greek word ἐνεφύσησεν (breathed on)  also occurred only once in the New Testament in John 20:22. In this chapter, the one who breathes on [the disciples] is also ὁ θεὸς (the God) in John 20:28 but he isn't the Father but Jesus Christ. Grammatically, John 20:28 calls Jesus ὁ θεὸς (the God) and this is strengthen by the context wherein Jesus ἐνεφύσησεν (breathed on) his disciples.

Only ὁ θεὸς (the God) ἐνεφύσησεν (breathed on) persons in the Old Testament (Genesis 2:7). In the New Testament, Jesus is ὁ θεὸς (the God) who also ἐνεφύσησεν (breathed on) persons (John 20:22, 20:28).

Whether we interpret God breathing on man either figuratively or not, the fact remains that the one who did the breathing on people is just the same O ΘΕΟΣ (the God) which the texts identify as Jesus Christ (John 20:22, 20:28).

I am taking excerpts from my article ''Jesus as θεός in John 20:28: An Inductive Analysis and Exploratory Research'' (2020). I hope it helps:

''This study investigated the unusual Greek of John 20:28 in which two articular substantives have a singular referent. This study searched through the Septuagint, the Greek New Testament canon, Biblical scholars and Greek grammarians. This study analysed data from an exploratory and inductive analyses to form new hypotheses from data. In the analyses, the researcher reports that Hebraism is the reason for the unusual Greek of John 20:28. The following are the findings in this study which explains why the two articular substantives (Ὁ κύριός μου καὶ ὁ θεός μου) in John 20:28 is referring to two persons in Koine Greek but has only one person in view: (1) The New Testament writers, acquainted with the Septuagint, followed after its usage of ὁ κύριος (The Lord) when referring to the God of Israel. Psalm 35:23, Revelation 4:11 and John 20:28 all have ὁ κύριος (The Lord). This indicates that both titles in John 20:28 are equally divine titles (2) the dative singular pronoun (αὐτῷ) in the same text is addressing a singular referent (Ἰησοῦς), and this shows that the substantives are in the vocatical nominative (direct address) and that this is in agreement with that of Sharp (1803) and Murray Harris's results (2009). The Greek of John 20:28 is not unusual but normative in the Septuagint. (2) It is shown that the Greek of John 20:28 is consistent with its parallels in the Septuagint, showing that its Greek is an example of Hebraism. There are three instances of Hebraism in the gospel of John (John 4:12, John 12:14, and John 28:28). Psalm 35:23 is not only a parallel but even an allusion to John 20:28 which supports its being a Hebraism. An LXX expert, Solamo (2015) had explicitly affirmed that John 20:28 is a Hebraism. Contextual analysis within the same chapter of John 20 supports these results even further due to another allusion from the LXX (Genesis 2:7, John 20:22) wherein Jesus was ascribed an attribute unique to the Jewish deity with a very supportive ὁ θεός allusion for 20:28. This finding provided objective evidence that Jesus is θεός in John 20:28.''

The Meaning of the Greek word μονογενης

The Only One (Unique)

Modern Greek lexicons has μονογενής (monogenēs) having two primary definitions: 

(i) pertaining to being the only one of its kind within a specific relationship and. 

(ii) pertaining to being the only one of its kind or class, unique in kind"

(Source: Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BAGD, 3rd Edition)). 

According to scholars, μονογενής is merely a fuller form of monos:

(God's Only Son: The Translation of John 3:16 in the Revised Standard Version, Dale Moody, 1953).

Only Begotten

It is commonly said that the rendering of μονογενης as unigenitus only started in the fourth century. However, we have evidence that μονογενης was understood as ''only begotten/uniquely begotten'' in the second century in Greek and in Latin.

Native Greek speaking Christians in the 2nd century C.E. understood γενής in μονογενής as "begotten''. Tertullian spoke of Christ as "unigenitus because alone genitus of God [Against Praxeas VII]. The Greek fathers like Justin Martyr used μονογενες in the context of the begetting of the Son before all creatures (Dialogue to Trypho, 105).

In the 2nd century A.D., the church fathers spoke of Jesus as ''only begotten'' before all creatures/ before the ages. In this case, μονογενες is understood as ''only begotten'' because no other son is begotten of God from eternity. However, in the Gospel of John, μονογενες (1:14, 1:18) occurred in close proximity with other sons who were also described as ''begotten'' (ἐγεννήθησαν) of God (John 1:12-13). In this case, μόνος in μονογενες should be seen as ''unique'' (i.e. alone of its kind, single in category): ''uniquely begotten.''

Jesus as ''Kyrios'' (''''Adonai'' in Hebrew) in Paul's Letters

Jesus being called “Lord” in the New Testament is an indicator of high christology. 

"Psalm 110, which is among the most frequently cited/alluded to Psalms in the NT, but has no trace of quotation or allusion elsewhere in second-temple Jewish literature". (Larry Hurtado)

Psalm 110:1 was not a Second Temple messianic proof-text. The NT utilised Psalm 110:1 to indicate that (i) Jesus is superior to David, Jesus being David's Lord, as recorded in the gospels and (ii) Jesus is superior to all things (except God the Father) because God the Father has made all else to worship Jesus (1 Corinthians 15:26-28, Philippians 2:9-11, Acts 2:34-38). 

Yahweh said to "my lord" (adoni in the Masoreric text (MT) written circa a.D.  7th - 11th century). 

Psalm 110:1 was the only OT "adoni'' text applied to Jesus in the NT compared to thirteen OT "adonai" texts applied to Jesus in the NT Pauline corpus.

 I cannot find the sentence "the lord said to my lord" in any of the Pauline texts. I realised that Paul never quoted it. He did allude to it in 1 Corinthians 15:25 ("until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet"). 

It's most likely that the reason why Paul was avoiding to quote Psalm 110:1 fully was the fact that it did noy feature his own belief which was  Jesus being given "the titles above all titles" (which every Jew of old up to this day knows to be "adonai") by God in Philippians 2:9. 

Both the one adoni text Psalm 110:1 and the thirteen adonai texts can help us to understand the significance of Jesus being called Lord in the New Testament. 

In Second Temple Judaism, the second lord in Psalm 110:1 was deemed as angel based on its royal-priest function linked to the priest Melchizedek, who according to Qumran Jews was an angelic figure in another psalm (Psalm 82) who rules over other gods (angels) who were royalties (being addressed as princes). In the Pentateuch, angels were addressed as adoni (my lord) and held priestly functions (bearer of the divine name/forgiveness of sins). 

In Psalm 110:1 we have Yahweh speaking to an exalted angelic figure, “YHWH says to my lord, sit at My right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.” Jesus Christ, in his risen status, is equal to angels according to Scripture. Luke 20:36 says that humans at the resurrection will become "equal to angels" (iso angeloi). Acts 2:34-35 quoted Psalm 110:1 applying to Jesus the psalm when he "ascended into heaven" (which was obviously in his risen state). In Psalm 110:1, the human Jesus in his immortalised state is now enthroned in heaven, ruling until the day when he will defeat his enemies. After ruling to defeat His enemies, Jesus will rule anew to dwell with his people in the new heavens and new earth to fulfill Luke's words that his (Jesus') kingdom "has no end". 

constantly bearing in mind your work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ ( 1 Corinthians 1:3)

When Jesus here is called “our Lord” it could certainly mean “our Yahweh.” Such a phrase does exist in the Hebrew Bible.

 The Hebrew has Adonai with possessive adjective ["our Adonai" = our + my lords] which refers to "Our YHWH" in Nehemiah 8:10. (see https://biblehub.com/text/nehemiah/8-10.htm). 

Scholars correctly identified that kyrios language identifies Jesus with Yahweh. This makes sense in regard to the multiple instances where Jesus is called “our Lord.” 

Psalm 110:1 has two figures: Yahweh and an exalted divine figure, one who was equal to the angels (the gods of ancient Israelite) as to immortality. The reason why Jesus could assume the role of being Lord even to all angels is because in his risen state he is equal to them. Think about it. Why would a man rule over an angel? An angel is obviously more powerful than men. Only someone angelic can relate to angels. Jesus, whilst being a man, is also equal to angels due to his immortalisation by God. It seemed that "angel" does not only refer to the function of being a messenger but also to being immortal. An angel is therefore in our modern language just an "immortal agent" . We have evidence that some Jews in the Second Temple period believed that humans did become gods/angels (e.g. Enoch, Elijah, Moses). 

1 Corinthians 8:6 should be read "one Adonai, Jesus Christ" because kurios in the Hebrew text (Deut. 6:4) was equivalent to Adonai. (...Adonai is one). Both the titles kurios and Adonai are substitutes of the Tetragrammaton (YHWH). Paul believed that God gave the name above all names/ the title above all titles to Jesus. Jews of old prior to the advent of Jesus already had the titles kurios/Adonai as substitute names for their God. For instance, the LXX had an anarthrous kurios (kyrios without the definite article) for YHWH, treating kurios as a proper name. The Masoretic text (MT) following a very ancient tradition used Adonai instead of YHWH in some texts. 

A human king was called Adonai in the OT but it did not indicate that he is YHWH. Adonai by itself addressed to a human king cannot mean the king is YHWH. Adonai that is used to YHWH in OT texts and these texts being applied to Jesus certainly does equate Jesus with YHWH since its application in the NT requires to conflate them. But the text was not applied to Jesus. It only shows that Adonai can be applied to humans. OT YHWH texts that were applied to Jesus had Adonai in it. 

Paul's avoidance of fully quoting the Greek text of Psalm 110:1 where it would have Jesus as adoni in Hebrew was motivated by his belief that Jesus was Adonai (1 Corinthians 1:2, 8:6, Romans 10:9-13). adoni being always a non-deity title, was avoided by Paul because it was not the title that's above all titles . Paul consistently used OT "adonai" texts to Jesus. 

"195 times YHVH and adoni are quite clear and adoni is never GOD. Jews carefully knew the difference.  Adoni is always the non-Deity title."

(Anthony Buzzard)

 Scholars and interpreters who take OT YHWH texts seriously in their reconstruction of early christology are doing a very great job. The earliest New Testament records regarded OT YHWH texts as chief reference from the Hebrew Bible to understanding Jesus. We should follow suit.

 

Chiastic Structures in the Gospel of John

Chiastic Structure 1: 

The chiastic structure (A-B-C-D-E-F-G-F-E-D-C-B-A) in John 1:1-18 highlights two choices to be made upon knowing the Logos: either reject him (v. 11) or receive him (v. 12). The entire prologue itself seems to be prodcued like a puzzle because the second part (1:12-18) refers back to the first part (1:1-11) and once fitted together they form a complete picture. John 1:12-18 alludes to John 1:1-11 and when they are put side by side,  John 1:1-11 intersects with John 1:12-18: (AA-BB-CC-DD-EE-FF-GG). 

(A John 1:1-2,  A John 1:18)

In the beginning was the Word (explanation of the unseen God)

The Word was with God (in his bosom)

The Word was God (the only begotten God, NASB)

(B John 1:3, B John 1:17) 

Through him all things came into being (through him grace and truth came into being whilst the Law came into being through Moses)

(C John 1:4, C John 1:16)

In him was life and the life was the light of all men (in his fullness, we all received grace on top of grace, overflowing grace)

(D John 1:6-7, D John 1:15) 

The light [which was in the beginning] shines in darkness and darkness cannot overcome it. (God sent a man named John to tell about the light, to testify of him, who existed before him)

(E John 1:8-9, E 1:14)

the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we saw his light, light as of the uniquely begotten of a father, full of grace and truth (John wasn't the light but was simply a witness to tell about the Light. The True Light , who gives light to everyone, is coming into the world

(F John 1:9, F John 1:13)

The true light cominf into the world the true light lightens eceryone ( born of God)

(G John 1:10-11, G John 1:12 )

He came to the world he creates but the world did not recognise him. He came to his people and they rejected him (to all who receive him. He made them sons)

Chiastic Structure 2: 

I was not able to find a source that showed a chiastic structure in John 1:1-2 but I discovered chiastic structure in it. I noticed that John 1:2 repeated John 1:1b. Then i read John 1:1 again, and noticed that everything is repeated (in the beginning, the Word, with God) except the single ''God'' ascribed to the Word in John 1:1c. I tried to connect them together and found out that it had a chiastic structure (A-B-C-B-A). 

A In the beginning was the Word, 

B and the Word was with God, 

C and the Word was God; 

B He was with God

A in the beginning 

This chiastic structure highlights that Jesus is θεος (God) in the very beginning of John's gospel. This showed that he deemed the Logos as a heavenly being/divine being, and not human being. 

Chiastic Structure 3:

John 1:1 and John 1:18 forms an inclusio:

The Word was God John 1:1c A

Only begotten God John 1:18b B 

 

in the bosom of the Father John 1:18c B

The Word existed with God John 1:1b A

It also forms a chiastic structure (A-B-B-A). 

Chiastic Structure 4: 

A larger chiastic structure (AA-BB-CC-DD) in the entire gospel of John. All of these speak of Jesus ''existing before'' something or someone else:

A: John 1:3

A: John 1:15

B: John 8:44

B: John 8:58

C: John 17:5

C: John 17:24

D: John 20:22

D: John 20:28

Chiastic Structure 5:

 Chiastic Structure in John 1:1, John 1:3 and John 1:18:

A: The Word was God 1:1c 

B: the unique God 1:18b 

C: All things came into being 1:3a

D: through the Word 1:3b 

D: Without the Word 1:3c

C: Not one thing came into being 1:3d

B: in the bosom of the Father 1:18c 

A: The Word existed with God 1:1b 

Analysis of the Chiastic Structure (A-B-C-D-D-C-B-A):

In (A-B-B-A) equated the Logos and only Son as the same person.

The highligted part of the chiasm was the coming into being of all things through the Logos/the only Son (C-D-D-C).

Chiastic Structure 5: 

John 10:33 and John 10:36 forms a chiastic structure (A-B-A-B):

For blasphemy, because you, being a man,

are making yourself God (v. 33)

You say...I blaspheme because

I say I am God's son? (v. 36)

Jesus quoted the first half of Psalm 82:6 in John 10:34 (''you are gods'') but the complete verse also had ''and the sons of the Most High''. Jesus is being contrasted against the sons who are gods in Psalm 82:6. Jesus was not blaspheming when he was claiming to be God and Son of God, because he's just telling the truth! Jesus was God (cf. John 1:1, 20:28) and The Son of God (John 3:16, 20:31).

The God of our Lord Jesus Christ: Functional Subordination in Earliest NT texts (the Pauline Corpus)

2 Corinthians 1:3

New Revised Standard Version

Paul’s Thanksgiving after Affliction

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and the God of all consolation,

Romans 15:6

New Revised Standard Version

6 so that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

A Petrine text uses this Pauline language:  

1 Peter 1:3

New Revised Standard Version

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! By his great mercy he has given us a new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

Paul believes that Jesus, as Lord, has a God. However, Paul indicates that Jesus' God is his own ''Father''. Jesus as Lord rules over everyone (the only exception is God the Father/ Jesus does not ruler over God the Father). In 1 Corinthians 8:6, Jesus is Lord ( i.e. rules over every creature ) because he created ''all created things''.

 In Paul's belief, Jesus' sonship is related to his lordship. Paul believes that Jesus is Lord of all creatures because he is God's ''Son'', the Son through whom God created the universe (Hebrews 1:2).The reason why all angels worship Jesus in verse 6 is because Jesus, as the Son, is the Lord of all angels. Jesus inherits the name ''Lord'' (Hebrews 1:4). In Philippians 2:9-11, God the Father gave to Jesus the name ''Lord''. Both instances (the inheritance of the name/ giving of the name above all names) happened after Jesus died on the cross (''when he had made purification for sins'' Hebrews 1:3). However, Jesus is already deemed as ''Lord'' in his pre-human existence in 1 Corinthians 8:6, Philippians 2:6-7, and here in Hebrews 1:10. God the Father acknowledges that his Son, as Lord, is Creator in Hebrews 1:10. 

Hebrews 1:1-6, 1:11

New Revised Standard Version

1 Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom he also created the worlds. 3 He is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being, and he sustains[b] all things by his powerful word. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,4 having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. 5 For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you”? Or again, “I will be his Father, and he will be my Son”? 6 And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God’s angels worship him.” .....10 And, “In the beginning, Lord, you founded the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands; 

If God is putting all things under Christ's feet, then it means that Christ isn't that God who put all things under his feet. The New Testament consistently identifies this God as ''the Father of Jesus''. And yes, also as the ''God of Jesus'' (Romans 15:6, 2 Corinthians 1:3, 1 Peter 1:3). 

Jesus, as Lord, has his own Father as a God over him. That is to say, Jesus, even in his being God, has a God over him.

Hebrews 1:8
Of the Son, he says: ''Your throne O God is forever and ever.''

Here ''God'' (the Father of the ''son'' in v. 2, ''begotten son'' v. 5) acknowledges that his son is ''God'', having the exact same title ''God'' as him. In the Old Testament, the Israelite king was the original referent who is being called ''god'' in Psalm 45.

God calling others god or even ''gods'' (as in the case of Psalm 82:6 LXX [quoted by Jesus in John 10:34]: ''you are gods'', does not negate the fact that God is one (The Lord our God, the Lord is one, Deuteronomy 6:4 LXX).

The evidence that Jesus and his God (and his Father) are the same Lord God is 1 Corinthians 8:6. Paul applies the Shema's 2 divine titles (''Lord'' and ''God'') with its adjective ''one'' to 2 persons (''the Father'' and ''Jesus Christ'') in 1 Corinthians 8:6.

In Philippians 2:10, Paul says that every knee that bends (mostly likely referring to the every knees of every creature) in the name of Jesus are located in three different locations (in heaven, on earth, and under the earth). All of these creatures that bend their knees in the name of Jesus will also confess Jesus is Lord to God the Father's glory (v. 11). The Father is being highlighted (''to the glory of God the Father'') when every creature worships Jesus as Lord. This is because every creature is worshiping Jesus as one who's carrying in himself God the Father's own name of ''Lord'' (''God gave to him the name above every name'' v. 9). 

1 Corinthians 15:27 wherein Paul says that ''everything'' -- except God -- was put under Jesus' feet). Jesus Christ is deemed as ''uncreated'' (not part of ''all created things'' which are subjected to his (Jesus') lordship) in his lordship. Jesus Christ, as the uncreated Lord, has the Father as his own God which only shows functional, not ontological, subordination between them. 

Jesus was ''made Lord'' and was ''given the name Lord'' by God

Acts 2:36

Texts with κυριος must be interpreted in its context, just like any other text.

Acts 2:34-35 is the context of Acts 2:36. It quotes Psalm 110:1 where it has YHWH said to adoni. Thus, the text is saying that Jesus is made adoni (Lord as Messiah, not Lord as God). YHWH himself is Lord (Adonai) as God.

In Romans 10:9-13, it quotes Joel 2:32 (a YHWH text) wherein the Lord refers to YHWH. Thus, the text identifies Jesus as YHWH.

Note

Adonai (literally, "My Lords" is used in the singular "My Lord" or simply "Lord/LORD" when ascribed to God)

Adoni (literally, "My lord" , singular of Adon)

Adon (literally, "lord/Lord")

Philippians 2:9

The Tetragrammaton (YHWH) is absent in all extant Greek MSS of Philippians 2:9-11. The "name (Greek: ονομα, name/title) above every name" in the context (v. 11) is the title κυριος, which means "lord" and since κυριος in this text refers to the written substitute of the Tetragrammaton, it is to be capitalised as either "LORD" or "Lord". In this case, it was not the Tetragrammaton itself ( = YHWH) which was given to Jesus but the title/name κυριος ("LORD/Lord"). This corresponds to the Hebrew Adonai (also means "LORD/Lord"). Both κυριος and Adonai are not the same as YHWH. κυριος and Adonai are mere oral/veral substitute as well as written substitute for the Tetragrammaton (the four letter name): "YHWH". They became known as names for Yahweh because they feature regularly/constantly in religious practises. The Jews first gave to God the name/title Adonai (κυριος in Greek/Mar in Aramaic) circa 3rd century B.C.E. and the Apostle Paul wrote that God gave it to Jesus in the earliest years of Christianity (Paul's letter to the Philippians was written circa 52 - 61 C.E.).


Note

1. In the Septuagint (3rd cen. C.E.), the written substitute for the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) is κυριος anarthrous (without the definite article), treating it as a name, not as a common noun. On the other hand, the articular κυριος in the LXX refers to superiors, masters.

Angelomorphic Christology in Acts 7

God "spoke" to us "through/by" many intermediaries: prophets, angels, and Jesus. Jesus is better than the other two. That's the point of Hebrews. I believe that the writer of Hebrews holds a tradition that the Son (as spokeperson in behalf of the Father) was better than the prophets and angels, both who were also carrying the function of being spokepersons. This didn't nullify the other tradition that the angel of Yhwh was the pre-incarnate Word, the Son of God, Jesus Christ.

The word "angel" in English is typically referring to a heavenly being. But the Greek word it translates (ανγγελος) is used to many non-heavenly beings (human beings "sent" by God to accomplish his will. When referring to these, it can be translated as "messenger" which has less connotations of being a heavenly being as known in the English speaking world. The word "'messenger" of course can translate it regardless of the essence of the one sent [1]) in the Greek Septuagint and the Greek New Testament. That is, the word ανγγελος does not denote essence, but function. Either heavenly or earthly beings are called that. So regardless of one's essence, if one is sent from God, he could be called ανγγελος. Thus, it is apt to call Jesus (the Word himself) ανγγελος because the Bible does refer to Jesus as one who is sent by God. In the 2nd century A.D., Justin Martyr called Jesus an ανγγελος while believing that Jesus was begotten "before all creatures".

The context affirms that the angel in Acts 7:32 was the Lord Jesus Christ himself:

Acts 7:30-33, 7:59-60 (NRSV):

30 “Now when forty years had passed, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in the flame of a burning bush. 31 When Moses saw it, he was amazed at the sight; and as he approached to look, there came the voice of the Lord: 32 ‘I am the God of your ancestors, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.’ Moses began to tremble and did not dare to look. 33 Then the Lord said to him, ‘Take off the sandals from your feet, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.  59 While they were stoning Stephen, he prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 60 Then he knelt down and cried out in a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he died. 

Notes

[1] How does "angels" typically used in scripture? Young's Literal Translation translated it as "messenger" in Hebrews 2:7. The English words "angel" and "messenger" equally literal translation of the word "anggelos". In English translations, if the translator chose "messenger" but it refers to heavenly beings, the translator specify it: "heavenly messenger". We cannot get "heavenly messenger" from the word ανγγελος alone, as the word does not connote essence, the English does, the Greek doesn't. One who is ''sent'' to be speak the words of God to the people in behalf of God is a ''messenger'' ( a spokeperson). A messenger could either be heavenly being or a human being.