Thank you. The detail would have involved a longer than normal gestation period if I remember correctly.
Can a Jew be saved without believing the Trinity?
- Thread starter Jacob
- Start date
Do you mean that you don't understand what I meant or that you do understand but don't accept it?
I'll assume the former for the purposes of this response....
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe. 8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9 That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world.
10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14 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.
6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe. 8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9 That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world.
10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14 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.
The bible really does speak for itself here. There's not much commentary needed. How much clearer can it get than, "the Word was God" and "the Word became flesh and dwelt amoung us"?
Also, since we are discussing this from a Jewish perspective, the use of the word "dwelt" in verse 14 is significant. It's not the normal phrasing one would expect. The literal translation would be "Tabernacled among us". John is alluding to the fact that the incarnation was the fulfillment of the Feast of Tabernacles. Jesus went on to fulfill one Jewish Feast after another right up through the Feast of Weeks (Acts 2) and would have continued to fulfill them all, the Feast of Trumpets being next on the list, but Israel rejected their Messiah and so God cut off Israel and turned instead to the Gentiles (Romans 9).
Anyway, I'm not sure what there is to "not follow", as you put it. John 1 blatantly says that the Logos is God and that the Logos is Jesus (Logos is the Greek word translated "word" in our English bibles).
Lastly, John the Baptist says in the next verse, ‘He (Jesus) who comes after me is preferred before me, for He was before me.’
Jesus was conceived in His mother's womb 6 months after John the Baptist and yet he states that Jesus was before him. How does that work if Jesus was not God?
If, as you believe, Jesus is not God then when do you say that Jesus came into existence and how do you square than with what John said in verse 15?
Resting in Him,
Clete
Clete,
Thank you for your words your attempt that I would understand. I accept all of this scripture. Thank you for sharing with me.
In regard to the logos I simply see the English and not the Greek, so I don't make much of the word logos. I don't think that I should have to. I hope that this is not a problem for you, but it is difficult to understand why people share that the word is logos when I do not understand that.
Verse 14 may be as you say, I do not know. How do you believe that Jesus, Yeshua, fulfilled the feast of weeks? I understand how He fulfilled Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
Correct that Jesus is not God, but He must have existed before John the Baptist according to this. I have thought about this before, but you give a good reminder.
Anything else?
Peace.
Jacob
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Job 9:8 KJV is a good verse too.
That IS a good verse. Thanks!
So, which is it of the OBVIOUS Three?
Is it the Spirit of God, or the Spirit of Christ, or God Himself, Who dwells in the Believer?
Romans 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
Romans 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
2 Corinthians 6:16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Obviously, it is all Three...In One.
For that is how the Apostle Paul had REPEATEDLY depicted that - he depicted all Three as dwelling and working in the Believer, as One.
1 Corinthians 12:4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 12:5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. 12:6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
Romans 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
Why not?
Colossians 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
The SAME Spirit, the SAME Lord, and the SAME God.
I'm reminded of a conversation I once had with a member of the religious cult, the Jehovah's Witnesses - at one point they erroneously asserted "how could God have been in Heaven and at the same time, dying on the Earth?"
Problem with that is that it attempts to solve its question through its own reasoning.
For passages like the above reveal that such a thing is simply not impossible for The God of All Creation.
Luke 1:13 But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John. 1:14 And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall rejoice at his birth. 1:15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb. 1:16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God.
The Lord their God?
John 20:27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.
Why did he say that?
Because that is Who He is...
Isaiah 43:15 I am the LORD, your Holy One, the creator of Israel, your King.
Creator of Israel?
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God. 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Israel's King?
John 1:49 Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.
I'm afraid the actual sense of the phrase "the Son of God" is one that is lost on many people.
For actually, it refers not only to that member of The Godhead, Who took on human form, but Who's resurrection from the dead, showed His being equal within The Godhead.
John 1:14 And 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.
Acts 13:32 And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers, 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.
13:34 And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies of David. 13:35 Wherefore he saith also in another psalm, Thou shalt not suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. 13:36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption: 13:37 But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption. 13:38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: 13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.
Christ was no ordinary "son."
Rather, "in him dwelleth ALL the fulness of the Godhead bodily" Col. 2:9.
Romans 5:6-8.
There is a lot to think about here. Thinking critically one may not accept it all. Great scripture.
They bring it up because the English word "word" is a horribly inadequate translation of 'Logos'. It gets brought up all the time in Christian circles because of this rather meaningless translation and as a result most Christians are familiar with it.
The point is, however, that if A=B and A=C then B=C!
Logos is God
Logos is Jesus
Jesus is God.
This IS the point that John is making in the first chapter the book that bears his name. In short, if you reject that Jesus is God, you reject the clear teaching of Scripture, in which case, what's the point of even bothering with Jesus at all? The only reason you've ever heard of Jesus is because of the very same Scripture!
It would take you about 30 seconds to look it up...
It's the Greek word skēnoō. It means "to fix one's tabernacle, have one's tabernacle, abide (or live) in a tabernacle (or tent), tabernacle" Source
There is, however, some disagreement on this. There are many who think that Tabernacles will the last of the Feasts to be fulfilled at His second coming.
Don't forget about the Feast of First Fruits, which Christ fulfilled on the very day of the Feast when He rose from the dead, being "the first fruits from the dead" (1 Cor. 15:20)
The Feast of Weeks is also known as Pentecost. It was fulfilled on the exact day of the Feast in Acts chapter 2 when Christ sent His "helper" the Holy Spirit. (John 14:26)
Man! The Trinity just keeps popping up all over the place!
Anything else?!
How many other people existed before they were concieved in their mother's womb?
How can you simply gloss over that? Where is the resistence to a perfectly clear truth coming from?
Resting in Him,
Clete
Greetings again Clete,
Psalm 33:4-6 (KJV): 4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth. 5 He loveth righteousness and judgment: the earth is full of the goodness of the LORD. 6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
Isaiah 55:8-11 (KJV): 8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. 10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: 11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
Kind regards
Trevor
But John 1:1 does not say “In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was God” as you are trying to infer. And how the Word, God’s spoken Word and the ideas behind that spoken Word became flesh is revealed in Luke 1:34-35, Matthew 1:20-21, not by the supposed shrinking of the Second Person of the Trinity into the womb of Mary. Jesus was born a man, the Son of God. As I stated before, I understand the Word in John 1:1 to be a similar personification of God’s Wisdom as found in Proverbs 8. I also like the partial personification of God’s spoken Word in the following:
Psalm 33:4-6 (KJV): 4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth. 5 He loveth righteousness and judgment: the earth is full of the goodness of the LORD. 6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
Isaiah 55:8-11 (KJV): 8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. 10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: 11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
Kind regards
Trevor
It is not a perfectly clear truth to me. I do not now what you mean by resistance. I do not see the Trinity where you do. I accept the Bible as best I can and have no problem accepting what it proposes, that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and that by believing I have life in His name. That is, He died for me for the forgiveness of my sins. I believe it, and so I believe that I am forgiven. And I don't know if I will be punished for my sin. That is me in a nutshell.
Shalom.
Jacob
Logos does not mean "spoken word". It simply does not mean that - period. What it means is "reason" or "rational discorse" and the absolute best English translation of Logos is flatly "Reason" or "Logic" - period.
But that simply makes no difference on this particular point. As I pointed out to Jacob, if A = B and A = C then B = C. That's very simple third grade level logic and John 1 makes use of this exact logic.
The Logos (however you translate it) is God the Creator of all things (John 1:1-3).
The Logos became flesh (i.e. Jesus) (John 1:14-16)
Therefore Jesus is God.
Quod Erat Demonstrandum
I mean that John chapter 1 flatly states that God became flesh, whom we call Jesus and that Jesus existed BEFORE John the Baptist and yet for you, "it is not a perfectly clear truth"!
There's gotta be some sort of resistance somewhere. It's almost certainly emotional because there is no rational way to read John 1 in any other way. It should convince you the very first time you read it. Literally any child can easily understand what John is saying. In fact, I invite you to try exactly that. Read the first several verses of John 1 to any third grader and ask him or her what they think is being said. They will get it right because they are old enough yet to be carrying around the emotional baggage that we adults have been collecting for decades.
No, of course you don't. That's why I point it out. It's everywhere once you just simply start taking the bible to mean what it plainly says.
Why do you believe that part of what the bible teaches and not the part where it flatly states that God became flesh?
What qualifies Him to have died for you? How is justice satisfied by the death of one man for the lives of billions? (I'm really asking you that question - it's not rhetorical.)
The wages of sin is death. If Jesus died for your sin, it would be unjust to also punish you.
Resting in Him,
Clete
I might be getting caught up in your words here, and I don't want to do that. I accept John 1, and aside from interpreting it if that is needed that should be enough. I do not see the words God became flesh.
There is much that can be learned by reading John 1 in English. I am not sure why someone would need Greek. But the original was written in Greek is what I understand.
A simple reading should suffice. I decline your invitation, but if I had children of my own I would want to understand what I was reading before reading it to them, if I could or can. You may have elucidated that I would not understand but the child would. However, you are kind enough to point out that we adults have difficulties that they might not.
I disagree that I will see the Trinity in my reading of the Bible. We have not defined the Trinity, but that might be necessary though your words are more valuable to me in a conversation.
Are you speaking of a particular passage or portion of scripture? I do not believe that God became flesh. I believe that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God and the Son of God and that all the fullness of Deity dwells in Him in bodily form.
He was without sin so He was able to take my place so to speak, though I have sinned at a later date having been born to my parents in this age.
Is it unjust to punish anyone because Jesus has or might have died for their sins? Is it unjust to punish period?
I believe that I have sinned in such a way that I have not been punished for it. Is it possible to punish anyone in a way that suffices to pay the penalty for what they have done? It is important to have healing, and a person may or might feel or think that if they are punished and brought to justice then they will be healed as opposed to being forgiven without punishment or justice such that they are healed. We think that forgiven means healed, and if there is a physical infirmity it just may mean that. People get old and die though still. So with age you can't be healed of everything though a person may die without having any physical infirmities.
Shalom.
Jacob
Greetings again Clete
Proverbs 8:12, 22–31 (KJV): 12 I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions. 13 The fear of the LORD is to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate. 14 Counsel is mine, and sound wisdom: I am understanding; I have strength. 15 By me kings reign, and princes decree justice. 16 By me princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the earth. 17 I love them that love me; and those that seek me early shall find me. 18 Riches and honour are with me; yea, durable riches and righteousness. 19 My fruit is better than gold, yea, than fine gold; and my revenue than choice silver. 20 I lead in the way of righteousness, in the midst of the paths of judgment: 21 That I may cause those that love me to inherit substance; and I will fill their treasures.
22 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. 23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. 24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. 25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: 26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. 27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: 28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: 29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: 30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him; 31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.
All suffering is the result of sin, Job is a great sufferer, Therefore Job is a great sinner.
John 20:30–31 (KJV): 30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: 31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
But I suggest that Trinitarians do not agree that this is the proper summary of the theme and purpose of John’s Gospel, and they actually have a perspective that disagrees with this summary.
Kind regards
Trevor
Fair enough, but it has a range of meaning and I suggest that it is not speaking about a Being in John 1:1 but a personified concept similar to Wisdom in Proverbs 8, where Wisdom is personified as a Wise Woman who was with God during the Creation process.
Proverbs 8:12, 22–31 (KJV): 12 I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions. 13 The fear of the LORD is to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate. 14 Counsel is mine, and sound wisdom: I am understanding; I have strength. 15 By me kings reign, and princes decree justice. 16 By me princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the earth. 17 I love them that love me; and those that seek me early shall find me. 18 Riches and honour are with me; yea, durable riches and righteousness. 19 My fruit is better than gold, yea, than fine gold; and my revenue than choice silver. 20 I lead in the way of righteousness, in the midst of the paths of judgment: 21 That I may cause those that love me to inherit substance; and I will fill their treasures.
22 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. 23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. 24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. 25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: 26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. 27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: 28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: 29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: 30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him; 31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.
One thing that I was taught in my youth was that you have to be careful with that type of logic, A=B and A=C then B=C. One title for this is syllogism, and if you look this up you will find many types, faulty syllogisms, partial syllogisms etc. There is often a fourth factor that shows your type of deduction as being faulty. In my youth one of our expositors mentioned his assessment of much of the logic by Job’s three friends could be summarised by the following faulty syllogism:
All suffering is the result of sin, Job is a great sufferer, Therefore Job is a great sinner.
This is a faulty syllogism, as Jesus is the Son of God. QED. I agree with the verse that Jacob alluded to and that you also tentatively endorse:
John 20:30–31 (KJV): 30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: 31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
But I suggest that Trinitarians do not agree that this is the proper summary of the theme and purpose of John’s Gospel, and they actually have a perspective that disagrees with this summary.
Kind regards
Trevor
Oh come on! What do you think, that I'm stupid? You don't have to interpret it, all you have to do is read it!
Do you not have an English bible?
Have I not directly quoted the relevant passages to you repeatedly already?
What sort of idiotic game are you playing here?
There is no way anyone will ever convince me that you don't know full well that the New Testament was written in Greek
Not that it matters one iota!
If you cannot simply read the book of John in Enlgish and understand it, you're stupid.
Only if you're a slobering idiot.
Not so much that a simple one time surface reading of the text of John 1 should suffice to convey the plainly obvious fact Jesus is God incarnate.
You can't even understand 4rd grade level English sentences. If you think I'm going to attempt to help you understand the Trinity, you're not only stupid, you're delusion.
The phrase "Pearls before swine" might have some meaning to your disfuncting Jewish mind.
The same scripture that tells you that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God is the very same scripture that tells you that Jesus is God incarnate! Both things are in the same book by the same author! John 3:16 is less than three pages away from John 1! Why do you accept the later and not the former?
That doesn't work for more than one other man! It is precisely the fact that Jesus was divine that make His death of sufficient value to pay the sin debt of the entire world.
The very gospel itself is undermined by the denial of Jesus' divinity.
Well, isn't that obvoious? If an innocent person is punished for someone else, how could it possibly be just to also punish the guilty party?
Common sense!
What? This question makes no sense.
Do you mean criminally?
If so, then yes, of course it is. What Jesus did on the cross was not about absolving crimes but sins. Sure crimes are sinful but the sinful aspect of a crime is not dealt with by the judge here on Earth. The judge deals with the criminal aspects of the act which have to do with maintaining a just and civil society. It is God who deals with sin. A murderer who is put to death here on Earth, is not obsolved of the sin because he was executed. The sin can only be washed away by the blood of Christ. If that is not done, the murderer spent the after life seperated from God (i.e. the 2nd death).
Complete jibberish!
The wages of sin is death. (Rom. 6:23)
There is no forgiveness of sins about from the blood of Christ - period.
The logic (i.e. the syllogism) is not at fault here. In fact, logic never - ever - is. Logic, or more apply, sound reason is nothing more than conforming your mind to reality.
You should find your old teacher and punch him in the face! He has has taught you to distrust the only means by which your mind has to learn, the only tool with which you are capable of discerning truth from error. He may well have doomed your soul to Hell in the process.
The error is not the syllogism, it is in the fact that the conclusion does not follow from the premises. It makes what is called a category error. The opening premise is a general statement while the second is a specific case. The conclusion would only follow if the opening premise were stated as "All of one's own suffering comes from one's own sin and not the sin of others.". In that case, the conclusion would follow but it would still be false because now the opening premise is false. Further, even if you wanted to insist that no such contegory error was taking place, the opeing premise, as stated, is false anyway. Think it through - if you can.
There, that was a brief introduction into Clear Thinking 101. In short, never doubt logic. You have to use logic in order to make any attempt to undermine it. Logic is therefore utterly irrefragable. Any attmept to squash it only squashes the squasher.
:rotfl:
Saying it doesn't make it so!
Indeed, He is!
Why would anyone disagree with a syllable of that summary?
Jesus was, quite literally, the Son of God. Before God became a Man, there was no "Jesus". Jesus was a human male born of a virgin and of God.
There is no denying BY ANYONE that this is the truth.
But as I just got through pointing out to Jacob, the very same author in the very same book that you just quoted a summary of also flatly states the the Creator became flesh and that His name was Jesus.
There only reason to deny that would be if you had some sort of axe to grind. Some sort of preconceived notion, some pet doctrine, that is at war with John's undeniable claims of Jesus' divinity.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Shalom.
I am sorry about the human element. I am human. I wanted to spell every thing out but I don't know that this was appreciated by you. Thank you for your response by the way. I value the time you put into it.
Of course there is no forgiveness apart from Christ. I may start a thread on the Trinity if you are not wanting to go through it. The question of if I need to know the Trinity doctrine has already been answered.
Shalom.
Jacob
glorydaz
Well-known member
Not speaking about a being? We see this "being" has a NAME, and his "vesture is dipped in blood". He even has King of King and Lord of Lords emblazoned on his thigh.
Rev. 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. 12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. 15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, King Of Kings, And Lord Of Lords.
Last edited:
That is a brillinat post! "His names is called The Word of God" - Wow, what a great verse! Just excellent!
Greetings glorydaz,
Kind regards
Trevor
Jesus is also the Way, the Truth and the Life, as well as the Word and he also has the name “the Word of God” as you have now quoted. There is a distinction between the Word in John 1:1, 14 and the being, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords who has the name “the Word of God” Revelation 19:13. Please note the distinction “the Word” and “the Word of God”. “The Word of God” does not say “the Word who is God”. All these terms find their greatest fulfilment in Jesus, but they do not prove what you seem to be asserting that John 1:1 is speaking about the Second person of the Trinity. John 1:1 does not say any such thing. You are following A=B and A=C then B=C or some similar logic which is faulty. Jesus is the Son of God, not God the Son.
Kind regards
Trevor