Exploring the Compatibility of the Logos in John and Philo with Torah Monotheism

John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Is the Logos described by the Gospel of John and Philo compatible with the monotheistic teaching of the Torah?

The concept of the Logos as described by the Gospel of John and Philo of Alexandria introduces complex theological discussions, especially in relation to the monotheistic teachings of the Torah. These discussions touch on the nature of God, the interpretation of divine wisdom, and the relationship between God and His manifestations or expressions in the world.

Philo of Alexandria, a Hellenistic Jewish philosopher, lived in the 1st century BCE to the 1st century CE. He attempted to harmonize Greek philosophy with Jewish theology, using the concept of the Logos as a central intermediary figure through which God creates and maintains the universe. Philo's Logos is not a separate god but an aspect of the one God, serving as a kind of divine reason or wisdom. This is somewhat compatible with the monotheistic teachings of the Torah, as Philo does not posit the Logos as a separate deity but rather as a means through which the singular, monotheistic God operates.

The Gospel of John, written in the late 1st century CE, begins with a high Christological statement that identifies Jesus as the Logos ("In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1). This Logos became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14). This introduction of the Logos as both distinct from and yet fully divine, coexisting with God from the beginning, presents a more complex challenge to traditional Jewish monotheism as presented in the Torah. The Christian interpretation of the Logos in John's Gospel, identifying the Logos as Jesus Christ, introduces the concept of the Trinity in later Christian doctrine, which asserts the unity of Father, Son (Logos), and Holy Spirit as one God in three Persons.

From a traditional Jewish perspective, based strictly on the Torah's teachings, the notion of God manifesting as the Logos in the flesh, as described in John's Gospel, would be seen as incompatible with its strict monotheism. The Torah emphasizes the oneness and uniqueness of God (Deuteronomy 6:4), and any division or plurality within the Godhead would challenge that foundational principle.

However, theological interpretations and understandings of the nature of God have varied greatly over time and among different religious traditions. Some Jewish and Christian theologians have found ways to discuss the concepts introduced by Philo and the Gospel of John in manners that they believe are not in contradiction with the monotheistic essence of the Torah. For instance, discussions around the Logos can focus on the ways in which God's wisdom and creative word manifest in the world, rather than on a literal interpretation of separate beings or entities.

The compatibility of these concepts with the monotheistic teaching of the Torah, therefore, depends greatly on the interpretive lens through which they are viewed. Intra-religious and inter-religious dialogues continue to explore these complex relationships, often focusing on the underlying unity of God as a foundational principle that can accommodate various expressions of divine interaction with the world.

The Quran's rebuttal to Trinitarian interpretations of the Hebrew Bible

How does God depict His unity in the Bible, especially in the Book of Isaiah?

In the Book of Isaiah, God repeatedly emphasizes His oneness and uniqueness as the only true God. Here are some passages that highlight God's oneness:

1. Isaiah 44, verse 6: "Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.'"

2. Isaiah 45, verse 5: "I am the Lord, and there is no other; besides me there is no god."

3. Isaiah 45, verse 18: "For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it (he established it; he did not create it empty, he formed it to be inhabited!): 'I am the Lord, there is and no other.'"

These verses, among others in the Book of Isaiah, affirm the absolute oneness of God and His exclusive divine authority. They reject the concept of multiple gods and assert that there is no deity besides Him. God's oneness is a central theme in Isaiah's teachings, emphasizing monotheism and the worship of the one true God.

-----

Some believe the Hebrew Bible, as the word of God that upholds the oneness of God, cannot withstand the onslaught of the Trinitarian hermeneutics. After all, the Hebrew Bible becomes part of the Christian scriptures known as the Old Testament. The Quran, as the safeguard to protect the unity of God, comes into existence to challenge the doctrine of the Trinity that creeps into the Hebrew scriptures. How is this argument explained?

This is a complex and controversial topic that has been debated for centuries by scholars and theologians of different faiths.

The argument that the Quran challenges the doctrine of the Trinity that creeps into the Hebrew scriptures is based on the following premises:

The Hebrew Bible, as the word of God, upholds the oneness of God and does not contain any explicit or implicit indication of a triune Godhead. The concept of Trinity is a later development that emerged from the interaction of Jewish and Hellenistic thought in the early centuries of Christianity.

The Quran, as the final and complete revelation of God, confirms the oneness of God and rejects any form of association or partnership with Him. The Quran explicitly criticizes the Christian belief in the Trinity as a form of polytheism and deviation from the true monotheism of Abraham. The Quran also corrects some of the misconceptions that Christians have about Jesus and the Holy Spirit, such as their divine status or their role in the Trinity.

The Quran is the safeguard to protect the unity of God from any distortion or corruption that may have occurred in the previous scriptures, such as the Hebrew Bible or the New Testament. The Quran claims to be a confirmation and clarification of what was revealed before it, and a criterion to judge between truth and falsehood. The Quran also challenges the people of the Book (Jews and Christians) to produce evidence for their claims and to follow the original message of God that was revealed to their prophets.

Therefore, according to this argument, the Quran is superior to the Hebrew Bible in terms of preserving and presenting the pure monotheism of God, and it exposes and refutes the doctrine of the Trinity that creeps into the Hebrew scriptures through human interpretation and influence.

In summary, the argument says that the Quran is a better guide for understanding the idea of one God because it strongly emphasizes monotheism. It criticizes concepts like the Trinity, which have shaped interpretations of the Hebrew Bible due to historical and cultural reasons. By clearly focusing on the oneness of God, the Quran guides people to embrace true monotheism.

The Council of Nicaea: Pagan Emperor Constantine Used Christianity to Unify Church and State

The Council of Nicaea viewed through the lens of Christian theology

The Council of Nicaea was a historic ecumenical council of Christian bishops convened by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in the city of Nicaea (present-day Iznik, Turkey) in AD 325. The main objective of the council was to examine the contentious issue of Arianism, a theological disagreement regarding the essence of the connection between God the Father and Jesus Christ.

At the Council of Nicaea, the Nicene Creed was formulated, which affirmed the divinity of Jesus Christ and his equality with God the Father. The council also established the date for the celebration of Easter and dealt with other theological and administrative matters.

The Council of Nicaea is considered a significant event in the history of Christianity, as it helped to establish key doctrines and beliefs that have shaped the faith of millions of Christians around the world.

Did Arianism preserve the true teaching of Christ?

Arianism was a theological belief system that emerged in the 4th century AD, which denied the full divinity of Jesus Christ. According to Arianism, Jesus was seen as a created being, distinct from God the Father, and not fully divine.

The majority of Christian theologians and historians consider Arianism to be a heresy, as it deviates from the orthodox understanding of Christ's divinity. The early Christian church, through ecumenical councils like the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, affirmed the belief in the full divinity of Jesus as consubstantial (of the same substance) with the Father.

While Arianism had some influential followers and gained popularity in certain regions during the 4th century, it ultimately did not preserve the true teaching of Christ as understood by the majority of Christians. The orthodox belief, as affirmed by the ecumenical councils and the Nicene Creed, holds that Jesus Christ is fully God and fully human.

How did Arius prove that Jesus was a created being?

Arius, a Christian presbyter from the 4th century, argued that Jesus was a created being rather than being co eternal and co equal with God the Father. He based his argument on biblical passages and theological reasoning. Arius believed that if Jesus were truly God, then there would be no distinction between the Father and the Son, and therefore no hierarchy within the Trinity.

Arius also drew upon philosophical concepts, such as the idea that God is immutable and cannot change. He argued that if Jesus were truly God, then God would have changed from being without a Son to having a Son, which Arius considered a contradiction.

It's important to note that Arius' views were controversial and were ultimately rejected by the mainstream Christian church. The Council of Nicaea in 325 AD condemned Arianism and affirmed the orthodox belief in the divinity and co eternity of Jesus with God the Father. Some of his main arguments were:

He appealed to Proverbs 8, verses 22 to 31, where Wisdom says, "The Lord created me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of long ago." He identified Wisdom with the Son of God and claimed that this passage showed that the Son had a beginning and was not eternal.
He cited Colossians 1, verse 15, where Christ is called "the firstborn of all creation." He understood this to mean that Christ was the first creature that God made, and that he was distinct from God in nature and essence.

He used John 14, verse 28, where Jesus says, "The Father is greater than I." He argued that this implied that the Father and the Son were not equal in power and glory, and that the Son was subordinate to the Father in rank and authority.

He reasoned that since God is by definition indivisible, immutable, and incomprehensible, he cannot have a Son who shares his essence and attributes. He claimed that only the Father is truly God, and that the Son is a lesser being who was created by the Father's will and grace.