[awareness]

Oh bro Ohio, stop it and stop it. You're a valued member of both chambers of LCD. Maybe it's a tone problem. It does sound like you don't like BJB's "heresy," so you are accusing him of being a JW ... like it's a put down.

Not to long ago I asked somewhere if BJB is a JW. He certainly holds the same views on the trinity and Jesus is not God as the JWs. Yet he doesn't, or didn't, seem to know that.

It's entirely possible that they both searched the scriptures and came to the same conclusions, entirely independent of each another.

That's what my JW friend tells me anyway ... and BJB basically argues the same.

But both has to deal with the preamble of John. John has two problems. One, no commas ... so they can be moved around willy-nilly. And two, it's not red letter.

So it's a product of whoever authored John ... and whoever makes a difference. The author of John has to be a Greek educated elite of his day ; thus Logos, and all that, that also has to be his intended audience.

Logos was in common currency in those Hellenized times. The Septuagint is covered up with it. And a devout Jew, coinciding with Jesus and his disciples, Philo of Alexandria (30 BCE-50 CE), wrote about it - in Koine Greek nonetheless. Philo, a Jew, conceived that God is the supreme deity, and the Logos second to it.

Some even conjecture that the unknown author of John nabbed it from Philo. Maybe, maybe not. At any rate, the author used it to claim that Jesus was the Logos in the flesh ... most certainly trying to convert pagans to Jesus. It's a childish conclusion that Jesus said it, and wrote it.