Paul Anchor on numerical identity and it’s absence in the same entity, the Word, taken from trinities.org

Paul Anchor

It seems to me that the blind-spot belongs to those who call themselves Unitarians.

John 1 v 1 asserts the numerical identity and the non-numerical identity of the Word with God. Both contraries are asserted to be equally true of the Word in relation to God.

The Word is God, i.e. numerically identical to God. He is with God, i.e. he is not numerically identical to God.

If Unitarians ignore this paradoxical revelation of the nature of the true God they are elevating their own mind above the mind of God and denying his revelation, barking up the wrong tree and wasting everybody’s time, including their own.

  • Avatar

    Paul,

    What you are defining would not be a paradox, but rather a contradiction. The thing with contradictions is that they cannot possibly be true. To assert that contradictory things can be equally true is to throw dialog out the window. You might as well say that you and I are both right, even though we clearly disagree. That would be a contradiction but in your world that’s just a paradox, so why even dialog? Dialog is not possible to have once you throw logic out the window.

    And it is really not charitable to think that John intended to write a contradiction when there are other options. If John did write contradictions then he really wrote nothing at all.

    Here is the statement to which you refer. Maybe a deeper look at it is in order before asserting that it flatly states something clearly contradictory.

    Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Paul Anchor on numerical identity and it’s absence in the same entity, the Word, taken from trinities.org

  1. Anonymous says:

    The debate on John 1:1 is basically over whenever the Unitarians and the Trinitarians refer to the Nicene Creed and the rephrasing creed (First Council of Constantinople) which showed that nowhere is Jesus called the Word.
    Jesus is just called the Son and the Light.

  2. madmanna says:

    The bible says so in John 1 and Revelation 19 v 13:

    Young’s Literal Translation
    and he is arrayed with a garment covered with blood, and his name is called, The Word of God.

    Commentary
    Matthew Henry Commentary
    19:11-21 Christ, the glorious Head of the church, is described as on a white horse, the emblem of justice and holiness. He has many crowns, for he is King of kings, and Lord of lords. He is arrayed in a vesture dipped in his own blood, by which he purchased his power as Mediator; and in the blood of his enemies, over whom he always prevails. His name is The Word of God; a name none fully knows but himself; only this we know, that this Word was God manifest in the flesh; but his perfections cannot be fully understood by any creature. Angels and saints follow, and are like Christ in their armour of purity and righteousness. The threatenings of the written word he is going to execute on his enemies. The ensigns of his authority are his name; asserting his authority and power, warning the most powerful princes to submit, or they must fall before him. The powers of earth and hell make their utmost effort. These verses declare important events, foretold by the prophets. These persons were not excused because they did what their leaders bade them. How vain will be the plea of many sinners at the great day! We followed our guides; we did as we saw others do! God has given a rule to walk by, in his word; neither the example of the most, nor of the chief, must influence us contrary thereto: if we do as the most do, we must go where the most go, even into the burning lake.

  3. Anonymous says:

    “Madmanna says: The bible says so in John 1 and Revelation 19 v 13: His name is The Word of God; a name none fully knows but himself; ”

    Basic Theology 101. Name is not nature. Since Jesus is named “the Lamb” is Jesus a lamb, does he have a nature of lamb? Certainly not, There are lots of names for Jesus, does he have various natures more than two?

  4. madmanna says:

    Name is not arbitrary. So it must have a close connection to either the nature or the actions of the person to which it is ascribed. Or it is a memorial to an historical event in which God was involved, as in a place name. Or it could be a commemoration of God if it is the name of a human being using God’s name.

    Isaiah 53 and the passion accounts etc shows why Jesus is the Lamb of God.

    Which of the 99 names of Allah has nothing to do with his nature?

  5. Anonymous says:

    “madmanna says: Name is not arbitrary. So it must have a close connection to either the nature or the actions of the person to which it is ascribed. ”

    The fact remains unchanged. Both the Trinitarians and the Unitarians can check anytime the contents of the Nicene Creed and the First Council of Constantinople which showed that nowhere is Jesus called the Word.
    The Word in John 1:1 is not for Jesus. Jesus is just called the Son and the Light.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: