How Early Christians Understood John 1:1

[Pegg]

Do you believe that Jesus created the world, as in John 1:3 "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."

In your view, what role, if any, did Jesus play under God the Father from the creation of the world until his birth?

yes we do believe he acted as a co-creator with his Father.

We believe that Proverbs 8 is referring to Jesus Christ:

22 “Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. 23 From time indefinite I was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth....27 When he prepared the heavens I was there; when he decreed a circle upon the face of the watery deep, 28 when he made firm the cloud masses above, when he caused the fountains of the watery deep to be strong, ...30 then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, 31 being glad at the productive land of his earth, and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men

this ties in with what Johh said "all things were created through him and for him and apart from him not one thing came into existence"

 

[Mark2020]

Why not ask someone who can speak Coptic?

Coptic John 1:1

Bohairic dialect:
(John 1:1)
ϧⲉⲛ `ⲧⲁⲣⲭⲏ ⲛⲉ ⲡⲓⲥⲁϫⲓ ⲡⲉ ⲟⲩⲟϩ ⲡⲓⲥⲁϫⲓ ⲛⲁϥⲭⲏ ϧⲁⲧⲉⲛ ⲫϯ ⲟⲩⲟϩ ⲛⲉ ⲟⲩⲛⲟⲩϯ ⲡⲉ ⲡⲓⲥⲁϫⲓ

Sahidic dialect:
(John 1:1)
ϨΝ ΤΕϨΟΥΕΙΤΕ ΝΕϤϢΟΟΠ ΝϬΙ ΠϢΑϪΕ ΑΥШ ΠϢΑϪΕ ΝΕϤϢΟΟΠ ΝΝΑϨΡΜ ΠΝΟΥΤΕ ΑΥШ ΝΕΥΝΟΥΤΕ ΠΕ ΠϢΑϪΕ.

Unlike Greek, Coptic has an indefinite article. However, this indefinite article doesn't correspond to the 'a' in English, as will be seen here.
Both Bohairic and Sahidic have the indefinite article ⲟⲩ, though in Sahidic it is contracted with ΝΕ into ΝΕΥ.

Actually this strengthens our understanding of the Qualitative [as in Greek].
We will see why:

One of the uses of the indefinite article in Coptic language is to denote a qualitative noun.

Qualitative, as in Greek, points to nature, essence or quality, not identity.

Examples:
1-
(1 John 1:5 [NIV]) God is light
(1 John 1:5 [coptic]) ⲫϯ ⲟⲩⲟⲩⲱⲓⲛⲓ ⲡⲉ (efnouti ou'ou'oini pe)
(1 John 1:5 [TR]) ο θεος φως εστιν

We see that the Greek word for light (φως) is anarthrous (without article). It is qualitative.
We don't translate it "God is a light", but simply "God is light".

In Coptic, the word ⲟⲩⲟⲩⲱⲓⲛⲓ has an indefinite article ⲟⲩ.
We can see that the noun here is qualitative not indefinite, despite the use of the indefinite article.

2-
(1 John 4:8 [NIV]) God is love.
(1 John 4:8 [coptic]) ⲫϯ ⲟⲩⲁⲅⲁⲡⲏ ⲡⲉ (efnouti ouaghapi pe)
(1 John 4:8 [TR]) ο θεος αγαπη εστιν

Again Greek αγαπη is anarthrous (no article).
Coptic ⲟⲩⲁⲅⲁⲡⲏ has the indefinite article ⲟⲩ.

God is love (not "a love")
The nouns αγαπη/ⲟⲩⲁⲅⲁⲡⲏ here are qualitative too.

So we've seen that the Coptic language strengthens our understanding that θεοςin John 1:1c is qualitative.

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Coptic indefinite article can be used with "God":[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot](Deuteronomy 4:31 [NIV]) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]For the LORD your God is [/FONT][FONT=&quot]a merciful God[/FONT][FONT=&quot]; [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](Deuteronomy 4:31 [[/FONT][FONT=&quot]coptic[/FONT][FONT=&quot]]) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ϫⲉ ⲟⲩⲛⲟⲩϯ `ⲛⲣⲉϥϣⲉⲛϩⲏⲧ ⲡⲉ ⲡϭⲟⲓⲥ ⲡⲉⲕⲛⲟⲩϯ[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot](Malachi 2:10[/FONT][FONT=&quot][NIV]) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Did not one [/FONT][FONT=&quot]God [/FONT][FONT=&quot]create us? [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](Malachi 2:10[/FONT][FONT=&quot][[/FONT][FONT=&quot]coptic[/FONT][FONT=&quot]]) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ⲙⲏ ⲟⲩⲛⲟⲩϯ `ⲛⲟⲩⲱⲧ ⲁⲛ ⲡⲉ `ⲉⲧⲉⲛⲧⲱⲧⲉⲛ ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In the previous two verses [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ⲟⲩ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ⲛⲟⲩϯ [/FONT][FONT=&quot](with the indefinite article) refers to “God”.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Coptic definite article can be used with "gods":[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot](Isaiah 36:19 [NIV]) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Where are [/FONT][FONT=&quot]the[/FONT][FONT=&quot] gods [/FONT][FONT=&quot]of Hamath and Arpad? [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](Isaiah 36:19 [[/FONT][FONT=&quot]coptic[/FONT][FONT=&quot]]) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ⲁϥⲑⲱⲛ ⲫϯ `ⲛ`ⲉⲙⲁⲣ ⲛⲉⲙ ⲁⲣⲫⲁⲑ[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Here we see [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ⲫ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ϯ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] (efnouti) refers to “the gods”, [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ⲫ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] is the definite article.[/FONT]


I think thus far we have destroyed the Coptic Anarthrous issue.

But let's go one step further:
It is noted from the link supplied in a previous post to the Coptic version, that the author of the website stopped at verse 14.

Anyone wonders why?

Here's why:
If we proceed to verse 18, we will find:

Bohairic:
(John 1:18) ⲫϯ `ⲙⲡⲉ `ϩⲗⲓ ⲛⲁⲩ `ⲉⲣⲟϥ `ⲉⲛⲉϩ ⲡⲓⲙⲟⲛⲟⲅⲉⲛⲏⲥ `ⲛⲛⲟⲩϯ ⲫⲏ ⲉⲧⲭⲏ ϧⲉⲛ ⲕⲉⲛϥ `ⲙⲡⲉϥⲓⲱⲧ `ⲛⲑⲟϥ ⲡⲉⲧⲁϥⲥⲁϫⲓ
ⲡⲓⲙⲟⲛⲟⲅⲉⲛⲏⲥ `ⲛⲛⲟⲩϯ : The only begotten God
Yes, there is a definite article ⲡⲓ.
It's basically like the Greek μονογενης θεος but with a definite article.

Sahidic:
(John 1:18) ΠΝΟΥΤΕ ΜΠΕΛΑΑΥ ΝΑΥ ΕΡΟϤ ΕΝΕϨ. ΠΝΟΥΤΕ ΠϢΗΡΕ ΝΟΥШΤ ΠΕΤϢΟΟΠ ϨΝ ΚΟΥΝϤ ΜΠΕϤΕΙШΤ Π ΕΤΜΜΑΥ ΠΕ ΝΤΑϤϢΑϪΕ ΕΡΟϤ.

ΠΝΟΥΤΕ ΠϢΗΡΕ ΝΟΥШΤ: God the Son the One and Only
ΠΝΟΥΤΕ: God with the definite article Π.

So we can see that both the Bohairic and Sahidic versions show the Divinity of the Son.


(John 1:1 [NIV])
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ​

And if this wasn't enough, let's see what G. Horner really wrote:

[FONT=&quot]Bohairic:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In (the) beginning was the Word, and the Word was (imperf.) with God, and God (indef. art.) was the Word.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Sahidic:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In the beginning was being the word, and the word was being with God, and [a] God was the word.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][I guess the author of the website [/FONT][FONT=&quot]previously [/FONT][FONT=&quot]given didn't like/see these brackets][/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]From [/FONT][FONT=&quot]http://www.forananswer.org/Top_JW/Scholars%20and%20NWT.htm[/FONT][FONT=&quot] :[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Horner's critical apparatus defines the use of square brackets as follows: "Square brackets imply words used by the Coptic and not required by the English"(p. 376).[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Horner translates [/FONT][FONT=&quot]John 1:16 as:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Because out of fulness we all of us took [a] life and [a] grace in place of [a] grace.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
He also renders [/FONT][FONT=&quot]John 1:26[/FONT][FONT=&quot] as[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]“[/FONT][FONT=&quot]I am baptizing you in [a] water”[/FONT]

So I guess, early Christians understood this too:


(John 1:1 [NIV])
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

 

[Shermana]

Why would one need to say "A merciful G-d" if there's only one "god"? Why not say "He is merciful"? Why have an article to indicate him in the first place

 

[Mark2020]

Why would one need to say "A merciful G-d" if there's only one "god"? Why not say "He is merciful"? Why have an article to indicate him in the first place

What a great argument against all that I presented!!

 

[Mark2020]

Just in case someone doubted my words about Horner's translation:

From the Apparatus:

 

[Scott C.]

yes we do believe he acted as a co-creator with his Father.

We believe that Proverbs 8 is referring to Jesus Christ:

22 “Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. 23 From time indefinite I was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth....27 When he prepared the heavens I was there; when he decreed a circle upon the face of the watery deep, 28 when he made firm the cloud masses above, when he caused the fountains of the watery deep to be strong, ...30 then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, 31 being glad at the productive land of his earth, and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men

this ties in with what Johh said "all things were created through him and for him and apart from him not one thing came into existence"

You identify Jesus as a god and as the Archangel. In what form was Jesus before he was born on earth? Was he a spirit? Do you believe that Jesus' spirit left his body at death and that, as a spirit, he went to heaven? Do you believe that he was physically resurrected, meaning that his spirit and physical body were reunited? Do you believe that Jesus is a physical resurrected being now and will be forever?

 

[Pegg]

You identify Jesus as a god and as the Archangel. In what form was Jesus before he was born on earth? Was he a spirit?

all angels are spirits, so yes, Jesus existed as a spirit before he was born on earth. But his life as a spirit ended when God transfered it into the womb of mary...from that point on, he was fully physical like us.
1Cor 15:47 The first man is out of the earth and made of dust; the second man is out of heaven. 48 As the one made of dust [is] (physical), so those made of dust [are] also (physical); and as the heavenly one [is] (spirit), so those who are heavenly [are] also (God and angels are all spirits)

Do you believe that Jesus' spirit left his body at death and that, as a spirit, he went to heaven?

No. For the reason that the 'spirit' when referring to mankind is the 'life force'. The hebrew word 'Ru′ach and Greek pneu′ma, both have the basic meaning of “breath”
and both these words are translated as 'spirit'
So the lifeforce within us is our spirit...its our breath from God. When that breath expires, our spirit dies.

So when Jesus breathed his 'last breath', his spirit expired, he died and did not exist for 3 days.

Spirit beings are those beings who exist in the form of invisibility...they are like the wind or like breath which is why they are called 'spirits'. Jesus said that "God is a spirit" because he exists as an invisible, metaphysical entity.

But mankind are not spirits, we were not created to exist invisibly. We are physical beings and the spirit within us is the life force which animates our physical bodies.

Do you believe that he was physically resurrected, meaning that his spirit and physical body were reunited?

No. The scriptures say he was resurrected 'in spirit'....that means that he took on his former life as an angel after his resurrection. For the 40 days that he appeared after his resurrection, the bodies were always different and not recognizable to his close disciples. Like the angels in the past, he had the power to construct and to disintegrate a fleshly body at will.


Do you believe that Jesus is a physical resurrected being now and will be forever?[/quote]

No. When Jesus was resurrected, he was not resurrected back to human life. This is evidenced by the fact that the scriptures say he was made alive as a spirit, not as a human.

1Peter 3:18 Why, even Christ died once for all time concerning sins, a righteous [person] for unrighteous ones, that he might lead YOU to God, he being put to death in the flesh, but being made alive in the spirit

 

[Katzpur]

When Jesus was resurrected, he was not resurrected back to human life. This is evidenced by the fact that the scriptures say he was made alive as a spirit, not as a human.

1Peter 3:18 Why, even Christ died once for all time concerning sins, a righteous [person] for unrighteous ones, that he might lead YOU to God, he being put to death in the flesh, but being made alive in the spirit

Is this the scripture you're using to substantiate your belief that He was "made alive as a spirit, not as a human"? What about the fact that He specifically pointed out to His Apostles that He was not merely a spirit, but had a physical body of flesh and bones? How do you explain what He told them, and the fact that He then sat down and ate with them? These are things a spirit could not do.

 

[Pegg]

Is this the scripture you're using to substantiate your belief that He was "made alive as a spirit, not as a human"? What about the fact that He specifically pointed out to His Apostles that He was not merely a spirit, but had a physical body of flesh and bones? How do you explain what He told them, and the fact that He then sat down and ate with them? These are things a spirit could not do.

angels sat down and ate with people too...but they were still angels. They could do that because spirits have the ability to materialize a human body. Angels sat and ate a meal with Abraham and there are other accounts where angels have appeared to different people in human form.


Jesus had to convince his apostles that it was really him, that is why he produced a body with holes in the hands and feet for Thomas. The body he appeared in was different to the one he had died in.

 

[javajo]

[SIZE=+0][/SIZE]Anyone can claim they rose "spiritually" from the grave. Christ rose physically.

Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up... he spake of the temple of his body.

And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus...Why seek ye the living among the dead? He is not here but is risen. (from John 2,Luke 24)

But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. Have ye here any meat? And he took it, and did eat before them. (from Luke 24)

 

[Katzpur]

Jesus had to convince his apostles that it was really him, that is why he produced a body with holes in the hands and feet for Thomas. The body he appeared in was different to the one he had died in.

Well, yes, it was different in that it was immortal. Before His death, His spirit had inhabited a mortal body. After His resurrection, that was no longer the case. But it was still a body of flesh and bones. I honestly don't see how you can deny that. And what happened to the body that had been laid in the tomb -- the one that turned up missing, the one with the holes in the hands and feet? Did it simply disappear into thin air? Are you saying that body is not the one He appeared to have when He appeared to His Apostles and others? You know, I've always found that JW's can provide scriptural support for most of what they believe, which is really admirable. On this particular issue, though, that doesn't seem to be the case. I don't see how Jesus could have made the point that He was a physically resurrected being much more clear than He did.

 

[IsmailaGodHasHeard]

Why do you say that, sojourner? I mean, I agree that how we understand it is relevant, but if the first and second century Christians understood it one way and the fourth and first century Christians interpreted it completely differently, wouldn't that be an issue worth looking into?

Good point. I believe in trinitarian monotheism, but good point. One frubal for you.

 

[javajo]

Scholars on Jn.1:1

 

[Pegg]

Well, yes, it was different in that it was immortal. Before His death, His spirit had inhabited a mortal body. After His resurrection, that was no longer the case. But it was still a body of flesh and bones. I honestly don't see how you can deny that.

i dont deny that he appeared in a body of flesh and bones. He did, just as the angels are able to produce a body of flesh and bones.

And what happened to the body that had been laid in the tomb -- the one that turned up missing,

that body was disposed of by God himself. It was similar with the body of Moses, he went up into the mountain to die, but nobody ever found his body because God disposed of it.

Psalm 16:10 For you will not leave my soul in She′ol. You will not allow your loyal one to see the pit
This scripture is alluded to in Acts 13 where Jesus death is compared to that of King David. Its says that Davids body was laid in a tomb and saw 'corruption', but Jesus body did not see corruption in the tomb.
34 And that fact that he resurrected him from the dead destined no more to return to corruption, he has stated in this way, ‘I will give YOU people the loving-kindnesses to David that are faithful.’ 35 Hence he also says in another psalm, ‘You will not allow your loyal one to see corruption.’ 36 For David, on the one hand, served the express will of God in his own generation and fell asleep [in death] and was laid with his forefathers and did see corruption. 37 On the other hand, he whom God raised up did not see corruption

So the reason why Jesus body was not in the tomb was because God 'did not allow it to see corruption' meaning, he did not allow decay to take effect on the body to 'corrupt' it.

the one with the holes in the hands and feet? Did it simply disappear into thin air?

the reason why Jesus had to produce the holes in his hands and feet was because when Thomas saw him, it wasnt Jesus body so Thomas said 'unless i see the nail holes i wont believe'
If Jesus was raised in the same body that he died, there would have been no doubt as to his identity but time and time again the apostles did not recognize him until he spoke to them.

Are you saying that body is not the one He appeared to have when He appeared to His Apostles and others? You know, I've always found that JW's can provide scriptural support for most of what they believe, which is really admirable. On this particular issue, though, that doesn't seem to be the case. I don't see how Jesus could have made the point that He was a physically resurrected being much more clear than He did.

John 20:14 After saying these things, she turned back and viewed Jesus standing, but she did not discern it was Jesus....She, imagining it was the gardener, said to him: “Sir, if you have carried him off, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.”

John 20:26 Well, eight days later his disciples were again indoors, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, although the doors were locked, and he stood in their midst

Luke 24:15 Now as they were conversing and discussing, Jesus himself approached and began walking with them; 16 but their eyes were kept from recognizing him.... 30 And as he was reclining with them at the meal he took the loaf, blessed it, broke it and began to hand it to them. 31 At that their eyes were fully opened and they recognized him; and he disappeared from them

Matthew 28:16 However, the eleven disciples went into Gal′i‧lee to the mountain where Jesus had arranged for them, 17 and when they saw him they did obeisance, but some doubted.

John 21:4 ...Jesus stood on the beach, but the disciples did not, of course, discern that it was Jesus.

All these accounts are evidence that the body Jesus appeared in was not the same as the one he died in. I dont know how else these accounts can be understood. He could appear and disappear, he could enter rooms without opening the door.... this can only be if he had a spirit body that could materialize into flesh just as the angles could do. The angles who took Lot by the hand when the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were being destroyed, the angles who sat and ate a meal with Abraham, the angle who wrestled with Jacob...they could do it because spirits can do such things. But flesh and blood bodies cannot miraculously change into spirits at will. We are flesh and blood and that is our body always.

 

[Pegg]

Anyone can claim they rose "spiritually" from the grave. Christ rose physically.

but the scriptures dont say he rose physically. Physical bodies are mortal bodies, but Christ was raised in an 'immortal' body
1Peter 3:18 Why, even Christ died once for all time concerning sins, a righteous [person] for unrighteous ones, that he might lead YOU to God, he being put to death in the flesh, but being made alive in the spirit

1 Corinthians 15:44 It is sown a physical body, it is raised up a spiritual body...
53 For this which is corruptible must put on incorruption, and this which is mortal must put on immortality

a body that could exist in the heavens
Acts 9:3 Now as he was traveling he approached Damascus, when suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him, 4 and he fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him: “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” 5 He said: “Who are you, Lord?” He said: “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting

Just like the angels who have spiritual bodies that can exist in Gods presence
Luke 1:18 And Zech‧a‧ri′ah said to the angel: “How am I to be sure of this? ... 19 In reply the angel said to him: “I am Ga′bri‧el, who stands near before God


There will be some from among mankind who will also be resurrected to heavenly life. their body will be 'changed' Paul says:
1Cor 15:50 However, this I say, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit God’s kingdom, neither does corruption inherit incorruption. 51 Look! I tell YOU a sacred secret: We shall not all fall asleep [in death], but we shall all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, during the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised up incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53 For this which is corruptible must put on incorruption, and this which is mortal must put on immortality

 

[SageTree]

how early christians understood john 1:1 is irrelevant. How we understand john 1:1 is relevant.

qft...

 

[Shermana]

but the scriptures dont say he rose physically

Where did his body go then?

 

[Pegg]

Where did his body go then?

it was disposed of by God.

God did not allow Jesus perfect body to experience the destructive process of decay, so he disposed of it himself to save the body from decaying.

When jesus was finally resurrected, it was a as a spirit...the same life form he existed in before he was born as a human.

 

[javajo]

Here's my belief: I think its silly, foolish, and very dangerous to believe that Jesus did not rise physically from the dead. His body was definitely gone (he had risen so no corruption), the angels said he wasn't there, that he had risen, ANYONE could claim they rose "spiritually", not much to base a religion and hope of eternal life on. It goes against all that has been preached for 2,000 years. But if people want to raise themselves up to be more holy and bring Jesus down to the level of a mere created angel to feel better about the fact that we are all as a filthy thing to a holy God, go for it. I personally don't think a mere angel could pay for my sins but that only holy God, who knew no sin was able to and proved it by actually physically rising from the dead. Believe it all or none of it, but lets not have some nonsense about a 'spiritual' resurrection, please.

 

[Pegg]

Here's my belief: I think its silly, foolish, and very dangerous to believe that Jesus did not rise physically from the dead. His body was definitely gone (he had risen so no corruption), the angels said he wasn't there, that he had risen, ANYONE could claim they rose "spiritually", not much to base a religion and hope of eternal life on. It goes against all that has been preached for 2,000 years. But if people want to raise themselves up to be more holy and bring Jesus down to the level of a mere created angel to feel better about the fact that we are all as a filthy thing to a holy God, go for it. I personally don't think a mere angel could pay for my sins but that only holy God, who knew no sin was able to and proved it by actually physically rising from the dead. Believe it all or none of it, but lets not have some nonsense about a 'spiritual' resurrection, please.

Paul believed that jesus resurrection was in the form of a spirit, not a physical human:
1Cor 15:44 It is sown a physical body, it is raised up a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual one. 45 It is even so written: “The first man Adam became a living soul.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

Peter believed it was a resurrection in spirit also:
1Peter 3:18 "... he being put to death in the flesh, but being made alive in the spirit"

Im not sure what form of christianity you've been taught, but I dont go past the scriptures for what the true teaching is.