"In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was
God" (John 1:1).
This passage is foundational to understanding the relationship between Jesus
and God. Before we look at places where we see a distinction made, such as
in the Upper Room Discourse (ch. 14 – 17), we must first understand what
John is saying here. It is no wonder that John (which makes the most
distinction of any New Testament writer) puts this at the outset. He is
laying a foundation. John says both that the word was with God and that the
word was God. In one and the same breath, the word is distinguished from God
and yet immediately identified as being God. How is that possible? I believe
that the answer to this is the key to understanding other passages in
scripture where a distinction is made.
First I would like to point out what John does not say. Notice that John
does not say that, "In the beginning was the Son and the Son was with the
Father and the Son was also God." Had John been a Trinitarian we would
expect him to say something to this effect to be consistent with Trinitarian
doctrine. To find a Trinity in his words we are forced to redefine the word
"God" in the middle of a verse. John would be saying that the word was with
God the Father but that the word was God the Son. But that is not what he
said. The same God whom John identifies the word as being with is the one
whom he states that the word is (the word was with God and the word was
God).
Trinitarians claim that the distinction is justified because the second
phrase contains the article before God (ton theon) but that the last phrase
does not (theos). My first response would be: Why does the presence of the
article demand that this is God the Father? Why not God the Holy Spirit? For
some reason, when a Trinitarian reads "God" they first assume it is a
reference to God the Father unless they have reason to believe otherwise.
Somehow the Father is more "God" than the other two persons. Second, I would
simply point out that almost every time the phrase "God the Father" or "God
our Father" appears in Scripture, the article is lacking. This includes
every one of Paul’s benedictions as well as several other verses (Rom. 1:7;
1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor 1:2; Gal. 1:1,3; Eph. 1:2; Eph. 6:23; Phil. 1:2; 2:11;
Col. 1:2; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:1,2; 1 Tim. 1:2; 2 Tim. 1:2; Titus 1:4;
Phm. 1:3; 1 Peter 1:2; 2 Peter 1:17; 2 John 1:3; Jude 1:1). So there is no
justification to claim that the second theos in John 1:1 does not refer to
God the Father simply because there is no article. Finally, John was a
devout Jew who had no concept of persons in the Godhead. The only God he
knew of was God the Father. Therefore, to identify the word as God was to
identify him as the Father (See also my article: Colwell's Rule and John 1:1
on this issue).