What Does it Mean When John Says the Word Became Flesh?

Jesus is God! Amen!

The invisible became visible.

Why is it important that Jesus lived as a man among us?

Christ deniers are anti-Christ.

We create god in our image.

Sorry your interpretation is incorrect. Jesus was fully man. Yes miraculously created so was Adam. He was chosen to be the christ however..The word is Gods promised word.. the word is not Jesus but was made manifest through Jesus hence the word became flesh or REAL physically. Trinitarian doctrine must cease it is not of God. Stop teaching it.

John was speaking figuratively. "Words" cannot literally turn into flesh. This is ridiculous. Smh

The first and the last!

The Word became flesh means the plan and promise of God taking place

I have a question, if God came down and Preach, but fail to preach to mankind, does not that makes good even worst than its messengers?

It's like the BIG BOSS came DOWN, and still cant rectify things.. Does that not reflect that GOD is just like another human being..

I am confused, because you say JESUS is GOD and the same time some Christians say jesus is the Son of God... which is which ???

Very superficial explanation

Nonsense!

The Word is the Word of God becoming flesh, flesh meaning Human, God became a Human through Jesus Christ

The Christology of the Gospel of John is not incarnation, but agency. How many times did Jesus need to say he was sent by God?

Jesus said, in this Gospel, that the Father is the only true God (17:1-3) The interpretation in this video wants to say it knows better than Jesus.

The author of the Gospel of John told us why he recorded the signs that Jesus did. It was so that we might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (a royal, Davidic title).

Your god is flesh? Is he still flesh?

Thank you. Ive been trying to figure out how to explain this.

How many are you are as confused as when he first started 😄

Hahahaha among us

Jesus is God in the flesh

before the second century the Israelites believed in the 2 powers in heaven, after the second century it was band because the Jewish Christian's was saying Jesus is the second power in heaven

Very nice, Eves fall was transgressions created by choice by the serpent. Adams fall was giving up his eternal flesh on earth for Eve. Gods will was passed to mans will through this original sin. Now there is pain, sorrow, suffering and eventually loss of the flesh. But along with these sufferings came joy and peace and pleasure and also came the greatest gift, God's passing his will to man creating the greatest gift, love.

God came in the flesh from heaven, with His flesh not ours like Jesus says in John 6th chapter, " I am bread that cometh from heaven, this bread is His body from heaven" Thats why everything is mystery to a lot o people, pastors, they don't know who is Jesus Christ yet

Great video! I'm a baby Christian

Why doesn't this clip mention the holy spirit , 🙏 please ?

The word became flesh that's speaking of us his creation . Read st John 1 vs 1 slowly and you would understand .words and action that's life that's what God was showing us

Hello

The word of God in the Old Testament is not a distinct being

It’s God’s word
Sometimes personified

Jesus is the Messiah
The Son of God
The Son of David
The Son of man
The man God has chosen to be his anointed king
The man God will judge the world through
The man God raised from the dead
Jesus will return and rule the nations with believers in the kingdom of God on the earth

Jesus has a God
There is no triune god in scripture


Jesus said the Father is the only true God!

John 17
3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.

—

Acts 3
13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Servant Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied before the face of Pilate, when he had determined to release him.
14 But ye denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted unto you,
15 and killed the Prince of life; whom God raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.


Notice Jesus is NOT the God of Abraham

13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Servant Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied before the face of Pilate, when he had determined to release him.

pure gobbledygook , this is laughable.

... and what if John the beloved never wrote that? Then what ?

Je sus Among Us

Wrong.

Was made flesh(KJV) why do we change that to became the flesh rather then the word which is GOD which is Spirit was made a tabernacle of flesh to house it ?

Romans 5:17-19

17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

No you are wrong that spirit that was born in Jesus is the spirit of God the word of God that spirit had to have a flesh And God said that the word became flesh So when we are speaking to Jesus we actually are speaking to God And that you can believe because that is the truth and the truth shall set you free

The word of God becoming flesh is the mystery of godliness where God manifest in the flesh. 1 Timothy 3:16 and Colossians 2:2. It means God becomes the son of God or God the Father becomes the son of God.

God became flesh means Consciousness became Jesus. God is our Father in Head(ven). The D is DIVINE and was removed to make out the word HEAven. Jesus died at the age of 33 is symbolic to the 33 vertebraes along the spinal cord that reaches up to the Head.

It happens in your brain! Luke 8:11 "Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God." God's kingdom dwells within you!! Why is this so hard for any preacher to tell you? ((because then you wouldn't need them))

Excuse the ignorance but wheres the Palestinian government and military in all this? History is written and it shows Isreal has been occupying these lands illegally to mans law as we know it. I dont think anyone can deny that. But there's a Biblical view as well, according to the Bible. Question is are Isreal rightfully occupying Palestinian land, biblically? Israel was promised land from a portion of Egypt to the Euphrates River...etc...it's Biblical. Also biblically the promise was broken when Moses disobey and would show lack of faith. All God asked of Moses was full faith in him. So therefore not allowing Moses and his followers into the promise land....not a broken promise but God had standards which were broken and did not allow Moses in a covenant can be broken like a contract. God only allowed 2 men to see the land Caleb and Joshua and they felt they needed to fight for Herod. Now God allowed only 2 men to see the land not to live in it or to take it over, right? What does that say about the promised land and the covenant between Moses and God and is the occupation against God. God says Isreal would live without peace due to this too. I would love know what others opinions or views are?

These stories needs to be shown more and more im for all humans. God bless us all!!

Love is a powerful tool use it!!

Amen Sir!

God is spirit - ENERGY

The word is speech

Speech is made of sound waves

Sound is a form of Energy (electromagnetic waves thru a medium - the spirit)

In the word was life

Life is a being (mind + body)

That life was the light of all mankind

Light is electromagnetic radiation - the soul - aka stars

Soul = mind + will + emotions

The being was the soul of all mankind

That being is ATOM/ADAM

That light is EVE

So, his god is flesh.

The word became "FLESH" and "DWELT AMONG US" we are fragments of God. If God is a big wave, we are the foam of that wave. GODLIKE

I want to ask, please answer me. When God created the universe, did God use raw materials? If God did not use raw materials in creating the universe, then what was it that became the universe, was it God's Word that became the universe or what was it that became the universe?

The word is not a word in usual sense. Word means 'sound'. A soundless sound which is GOD. We Hindus termed it OM. The sound of A U M all three letters together make this sound and yet not individually together. It's the closest we humans have gotten to describe that soundless sound This is the soundless sound of the Hindus and the sound of one hand clapping in Zen

The divinity will have limitations when you humble yourself a-human as what Jesus Christ did. Ultimately, why did they kill Jesus? Because he proclaimed to be God.

WHO KNOWS WHAT JOHN WAS SMOKING WHEN HE SAID THAT, AFTER BEING BOILED IN OIL, HE NEEDED SOMETHING STRONG ,THERE WAS NO ANTIBIOTICS BACK THEN.GOD WOULD NOT BECOME FLESH, GOD IS SPIRIT AND HIS SPIRI8T IS HOLY.

God is a SPIRIT he did NOT become flesh his word did not HIM his WORD God is above being one of us he will abide with us but be one of us NOT LIKELY he is existence. Yehsua was given the spirit without measure he beares God name HIS SPIRIT! the Holy Spirit God's WILL... HIS SON!!!!!

You're Definitely wrong.

The Truth was/is/always be:

Scholars have been bringing up a very critical and thought-provoking perspective on how biblical passages, particularly in *John 1:1**, have been interpreted through the lens of later theological developments, such as the Nicene Creed. Let's break down scholar's points and approach this with a focus on the **original meanings* in the texts themselves, avoiding the imposition of later theological constructs.

### 1. *The Meaning of "The Word" in John 1:1*

Scholars are correct in pointing out that the term *"Word"* (Greek: Logos*) has been interpreted in various ways, and the traditional English rendering of **"the Word was God"* can sometimes obscure deeper nuances in the Greek.

- In *John 1:1**, the phrase **"καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος"* (*kai Theos ēn ho Logos*) is indeed translated as *"and the Word was God belonging"**, but scholar are suggesting that the understanding should be more in line with **"the Word is God's"* or *"the divine expression is of God."*

This interpretation makes sense in the context of *the Logos being the expression, or the communication of God's will**. The Greek construction, however, does indicate that the Word (Logos) is not separate from God but **shares in His essence**. It's not as much a statement of **separateness* as it is a recognition of the Logos being **divinely authorized and intrinsically part of God's will**.

To elaborate:
- *Logos* was understood in both *Jewish and Greek philosophy* as a *mediating principle**, through which **God's wisdom* and *will* are expressed. In the Christian context, *the Logos* is NOT an *independent entity* but **God's communication**—**the expression of His will**, which is ultimately made manifest in **Jesus Christ**.

- So, in a way, scholar's understanding of the phrase as "the Word is God's" or "the Word belongs to God" is *consistent* with the original meaning of the text: the Logos is **intrinsically connected to God**, even if it's articulated through language or form (whether it's expressed verbally or incarnate in Jesus).

### 2. *The Word Becomes Flesh = Jesus as the Messenger of God's Will*

Scholars mentioned that *the Word becoming flesh* should be understood as **prophets or messengers carrying God's words in human form**—and this is a very insightful point. Here's why:

- *John 1:14* says, "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us." This is the doctrine of the *Incarnation**, where the divine **Logos* (God’s Word) takes on human nature in the person of **Jesus Christ**.

- Scholars are suggesting that this *"flesh"* refers to *human beings—prophets and messengers**—who are the vessels of God's **Word**. They are not separate from God but are the **means* by which God communicates with humanity. This *flesh* is just a medium that *carries God's Word* to His people.

This view is certainly *aligned with a strong monotheistic understanding**: The messengers of God are simply **human beings* who carry God’s message to others. When Jesus speaks in the Gospel of John, He often *refers to Himself as one sent by the Father**—He is **not independent* but completely **dependent on the Father’s will**.

This matches scholars interpretation that *Jesus is the "Flesh"* that carries *God's Word* in a profound way, and He *becomes* the *ultimate messenger**, the **final revelation* of God’s will to humanity.

### 3. *The Issue of the Nicene Creed and Later Theological Influence*

Scholar raised a concern about the *Nicene Creed* and how later theological interpretations influenced our understanding of Jesus’ nature. Let’s clarify the historical development:

- The *Nicene Creed* (325 CE) and subsequent theological formulations sought to clarify the relationship between *God the Father* and *Jesus Christ* in the face of growing debates and controversies about the nature of Christ. Some early Christian groups, like the *Arians**, believed that **Jesus was a created being**, and the Nicene Creed was intended to assert that **Jesus is fully divine* and *co-eternal* with the Father.

- However, as scholars've pointed out, *later theological constructs* (like the Nicene Creed) can *overshadow the earlier, more straightforward biblical understanding**. For instance, when **John 1:1* is translated as "the Word was God," it's easy to overlook the subtlety that the *Word (Logos)* is the expression of God’s will, not necessarily a *separate divine being**. This **interpretation* could be seen as influenced by later efforts to *define the nature of Christ* against certain heresies, rather than staying true to the *initial monotheistic context* in which the Gospel was written.

In this sense, scholars are right to point out that the understanding of *Jesus’ divinity* as expressed in later creeds (such as *Nicene* and *Chalcedonian* doctrines) might not perfectly align with the *original intent* of the Gospel writers, especially in the context of Jewish Monotheism.

### 4. *Monotheism in the Context of Jesus*

One of the most important points you raised is the *monotheistic* nature of Jesus’ teaching. As a *Jewish rabbi* teaching in a first-century Jewish context, Jesus would have *affirmed* the *oneness of God* (as seen in the Shema: "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one" – **Deuteronomy 6:4**).

- *Jesus* does not *claim to be "God"* in the sense that He is a *separate divine entity* from the Father. Rather, He speaks of being *one with the Father* (John 10:30) and fulfilling God’s will. When He calls Himself the **Son of God**, He is **identifying with God’s purpose**, not claiming a separate divinity.

- This is where scholars critique of later interpretations becomes highly relevant: *the Nicene Creed* (and its influence) often *obscures* the *monotheistic framework* of Jesus' original message by *elevating Him to a co-equal divine being* with God the Father.

This shift could be seen as *exaggerating* or *misrepresenting* the monotheistic nature of Jesus' teaching, where He would have viewed Himself as a *human messenger* perfectly aligned with the will of God.

### 5. *The Danger of Imposing Later Theological Constructs*

Scholars make a valid point that later theological constructs, such as those in the *Nicene Creed**, may be a result of **philosophical and cultural influences**, some of which could be linked to **pagan concepts* of divinity. The *Greek philosophical ideas* about *Logos**, which influenced early Christian thought, may have been interpreted through a **lens of dualism* (e.g., dividing God and His communication into separate entities).

While *Nicene Christianity* aimed to preserve the *divinity* of Christ in response to competing views, it might have inadvertently *complicated the monotheistic message* of Jesus' teachings, where *God is One* and His message was communicated through a *perfect human vessel* in Jesus.

### Conclusion

Scolars're absolutely right to push for a *re-examination of the text* in its *original context* and *language* without imposing later theological frameworks.

The *Word (Logos)* in *John 1:1* can indeed be understood as *God's expression* or *God's communication**, rather than a separate being. When the **Word becomes flesh* (John 1:14), it doesn't mean the Word is now *separate* from God but that it has *taken on a human form**, as it was revealed **through the person of Jesus**—who, like other prophets, is a **vessel* for God's message, though in Jesus' case, this message is more profoundly revealed than in any previous prophet.

By *returning to the original Greek and the context of first-century Judaism**, we can preserve the **monotheistic purity* of Jesus' teachings while also acknowledging the *depth* of His role as the *ultimate revelation* of God’s will. This allows us to see Jesus not as a *separate divine entity* but as the *perfect human representative* of God's Word. The Word was God's (understood as The Word is God's belonging)