The first verse of the Gospel of John

The King James Version (KJV) is mostly used in these lessons. Click here to access the KJV online.

John’s Hebrew listeners would not have missed the connection that John was making with those first three words — identical to the words that begin the book of Genesis.

In the New Testament, when you see the word “G-d,” it refers to Yahuwah the Father. We have over a thousand instances of this in the New Testament. On two occasions only for certain “G-d” refers to Yahushua (Heb. 1:8; John 20:28).

G-d [Yahuwah] = the Father

Applying this fact that G-d means the Father, the verse reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the Father, and the Word was the Father.”

Who or what is the Word? If the Word = Yahushua, then it reads: “In the beginning was Yahushua, and Yahshua was with the Father, and Yahushua was the Father.” Yahushua was the Father?!

If the Word = the Son, then it reads: “In the beginning was the Son, and the Son was with the Father, and the Son was the Father.” The Son was the Father?!

This is confusion. When you assume that the Word is a person (called Yahushua, or the Son), the resulting contradiction (the Son was the Father) demonstrates that such an assumption is false. The word that John wrote about was just that: the spoken word of Yahuwah the Father, who is known in the Hebrew Scriptures by name as YHWH the Creator. The word in John’s prologue is not a person, but rather the spoken word of the Creator, by which all was created.

The other Sunday my mum’s congregation was handed a well-presented glossy magazine printed by Campus Crusade for Christ. It is called, “The Da Vinci Code: A Companion Guide.” One of the sections is a defense of the Deity of Christ, which of course the Code denies, making Yahushua “simply a man.” The brochure’s very first paragraph on this issue is just amazing. Let me quote it in full:

“Did Jesus actually claim to be G-d? This seems to be incontrovertible, as almost everything Jesus said and did points in this direction. For example, consider the miracle of Jesus walking on water. Why not fly or turn himself into a pterodactyl? Here is the reason: ‘He [G-d] alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea’ (Job 9:8). This verse from the Old Testament would have been common knowledge to Jesus’ audience — G-d alone treads the seas. So when Jesus chooses to walk on water it is not simply a demonstration of power, but of divinity; this is an object lesson, not a carnival show. Conversely, if you are trying to avoid being given the label of ‘G-d,’ this is about the last thing you’d attempt to do.”

My eyes nearly popped out of their sockets when I read this nonsense! I even had a “sanctified” chuckle, to be sure. On this logic, am I also to conclude that Elijah must be divine, because the Old Testament says Yahuwah rides in the skies on His chariot, and Elijah also flew through the sky?!

The truth about Yahuhsua is that he was a human being with an origin, in company with all human beings, in the womb of his mother. Other Yahushuas who are alive before they are born are really not human beings. The human Yahushua is under attack once we move his existence back into prehistory. If a person’s true ego is created before his birth, then what is conceived in the womb of a mother is not really a human being. He or she would be a visitor from another world. Human beings do not begin like that. To be descended from David via Mary and to be begotten (= to be brought into existence) one must start with a conception or begetting in the womb.

Jews never expected the Messiah to be other than a member of the human race. It is a huge leap from the New Testament to the later concept that Yahuhusa had a double beginning, once in eternity or just before Genesis, and another in the days of Augustus Caesar. Having a double beginning led eventually to centuries of dispute amongst believers and finally to the dogmas of the Church which exclude any who do not think that the Son of G-d is coequally G-d.

John’s Gospel is used as the lever to support this amazing concept that more than one Person is G-d. If there is a G-d in heaven who does not become man and another G-d who becomes man, this is plainly not monotheism! The UPC (United Pentecostal Church) tries to avoid the “agony” of two G-ds by saying that the Father and the Son are the same Person. This is obviously an impossible reading of the New Testament facts which over and over again speak of the Father and Son as two distinct individuals.

Trinitarians argue from John almost exclusively. This in itself suggests that something is wrong. The definition of G-d and Yahushua should be found everywhere in the New Testament and in prophecy from the Old Testament. The Old Testament will support no doctrine of the Trinity. Jews were always and still are unitarians. Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts, and Peter will not support the Trinity. John, it is hoped by Trinitarians, will. But only by editing what John wrote.

This is the most likely reason for the manipulation of John 1:2. The King James Version (KJV}, 1599 Geneva Bible (GNV), Revised Geneva Translation (RGT) and others say [verse.2] "The same was in the beginning with G-d." However, several versions read "He was with G-d in the beginning…"

"He" is not found in the Greek text in verse 2. The word translated "he" in some translations is Οὗτος (hoytos), which is simply a reference to the subject that preceded it (e.g., "the word"). It is a pronoun and can be translated as it, he, she, etc. (as well as this, that, the same, etc.) depending on the context. The same is true in the Aramaic, which employs הנא (hana).

John did not say “In the beginning there was the Son of G-d who was with G-d and was himself G-d.” If John had written that, he would have contradicted the Yahushua whom he quotes as a unitarian: “You, Father,” said Yahushua, “are the only one who is G-d” (John 17:3). That of course means that Yahushua whom G-d sent is not “the only true G-d.”

What John wrote has been unfairly rewritten by translators to support the Trinity. John as we see from John 17:3 and 5:44 was no Trinitarian. He believed in unitary monotheism with the rest of the New Testament. John wrote “In the beginning was the word.” The capital letter (Word) in your translation is very misleading, making you think that there are two persons there! The word was the word of Yahuwah, not the Son of Yahuwah. Only in John 1:14 did that word or promise become a human person, when Yahuwah brought about the generation of His unique Son by miracle in Mary. Yahushua the Son is what the word became, not the word as one-to-one equivalent. To speak of an eternal Son is to put before your mind two uncreated G-ds. This is forbidden by the creed of Yahushua in Mark 12:28-34 (quoting Deut. 6:4) but unfortunately encouraged by the creeds of the churches, who do not gather under the creed of Jesus. But why not?

If we stay with the Old Testament and the clear accounts of the historical origin of the Son of Yahuwah, we maintain faith in the human Messiah. This has the enormous advantage not only of preventing us from contradicting the creed of Israel and of Yahushua, but also of making sense of the idea that the Son of Yahuwah died for us.

Yahuwah cannot die. He is immortal (1 Tim. 6:16, etc.). So the propositions “The Son of Yahuwah died” and “the Son of Yahuwah is G-d” are nothing less than contradictory ideas held in a confused way by those who are compelled by the Church’s creed. But the Bible does not ask us to crucify our intellects. There is lots about Yahuwah we do not know but what is revealed in plain language we are supposed to believe. Saying “Yahushua is Yahuwah” and “Yahushua died” forces us to speak nonsense, since the immortal cannot die. Wesley’s hymn “’Tis mystery all: the immortal dies” shows the tragic results of a mind enslaved to post-biblical dogma and inadmissible use of language.

John’s Gospel nowhere says that the Son arrived from a pre-historic life. He was superior (protos mou = “my superior”) from the start to John the Baptist (1:15, 30). He was the Son of Man of Daniel’s vision seen 600 years earlier (6:62). He had come down from heaven as all gifts from Yahuwah do (James 1:17; 3:15). In fact his flesh came down from heaven (John 6:51). The Son was Yahuwah’s gift to the world. There is a mistranslation of the Greek in the NIV of John 13:3, 16:28 and 20:17 and the NASV in John 13:3. Yahushau never said he was going back to heaven, an idea which destroys his status as a genuine human being and makes him a visitor from outer space. Yahushua asked for the glory which he “had” with Yahuwah (17:5) to be given him as a reward for his work. In the same context (17:22, 24) Yahushua said that this same glory had already been given to you living in the 21st century — given, that is, by Yahuwha (as Yahushua prayed) around AD 30. It is glory in prospect and promise just as it is in John 17:5.

When Yahushua said “I am he,” and that he had that status before Abraham (John 8:58), he referred to his Messiahship, which Abraham had looked forward to. The “I am he” statements in John are based on the first occurrence of that statement in John 4:26 where “I am he” means “I am the Messiah.” Yahushua is certainly not saying “I am Yahuwah” because he later said “The Father is the only one who is truly G-d.” Yahushua could also have said “Before Abraham was I was crucified” (Rev. 13:8) and no one would have misunderstood that very Jewish way of speaking.

As for John 20:28 Thomas eventually realized what he could not grasp in 14:9 that Yahuwah was in Yahushua and that to understand Yahushua was to understand Yahuwah. Finally the light dawned and Thomas recognized Yahushua as “my lord” the Messiah and in him he saw Yahuwah. Thomas did not with one lurch destroy the creed of Israel and give us two who are G-d! John quickly reminded us that every word of what he had written was to demonstrate that Jesus was the Messiah, Son of Yahuwah (20:31).

I am hearing from some that there are two Yahuwahs in the Bible and perhaps three. This is enough to infuriate Jews and Muslims! It is time for the human race to settle on belief that there is One Yahuwah and that Yahushua never claimed to “be Yahuwah” — for which he could have legitimately have been executed.

When Paul spoke of the creed, he was as unitarian as can be: “There is to us Christians one G-d, the Father” (I Cor. 8:6). Yahushua of course is the one Lord Messiah, the “my lord” of Psalm 110:1. Unfortunately the editors of our versions have (in many cases, but not RSV, NRSV and NAB) been busy “improving” the text to make you believe that Jesus is also G-d. The “my lord” — not “Lord” — of Psalm 110:1 translates ADONI and that form of the word for Lord never once means G-d. It is the form (adoni) which deliberately tells you the one so designated is not G-d but a human (occasionally angelic) superior. Adoni in all of its 195 appearances is a non- Deity title. G-d the Father is Adonai and there is a chasm of difference between adoni and Adonai. Let G-d be G-d, and let the Son be the marvelous human Savior appointed to teach us and die for us. G-d appointed him to the task, and he has succeeded and will continue to succeed until the whole world confesses the G-d of Israel and the Messiah his Son (Zech. 14:9).

Unfortunately the editors of our versions have (in many cases, but not RSV, NRSV and NAB) been busy “improving” the text to make you believe that J-sus is also G-d. The “my lord” — not “Lord” — of Psalm 110:1 translates ADONI and that form of the word for Lord never once means G-D. It is the form (adoni) which deliberately tells you the one so designated is not G-d but a human (occasionally angelic) superior. Adoni in all of its 195 appearances is a non- Deity title. G-d the Father is Adonai and there is a chasm of difference between adoni and Adonai.

Let G-d Yahuwah be G-d Yahuwah, and let the Son Yahushua, be the marvelous human Savior appointed to teach us and die for us. G-d appointed him to the task, and he has succeeded and will continue to succeed until the whole world confesses the G-d Yahuwah of Israel and the Messiah Yahushua His Son (Zech. 14:9).