• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

John 1:1

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
In what language were the Christian scriptures written? Koine Greek....the common languageof the day.

In Greek, there is no indefinite article ("a" or "an") so wherever you see an indefinite article in the English translation of the Bible, it was inserted by the translators in order to read correctly in English.

In Greek however there is a definite article ("the") so in John 1:1 we see the use of the definite article in identifying "the God" whereas the definite article is missing in identifying the Logos as "the God" but rather as a godlike one...a divinely authorized person.

God himself identified Israelite judges as "gods" because of their divine authority. Moses likewise was said to be "God" to Pharaoh.....it didn't mean that they were "the God" whose personal name would have clarified all those scriptures where it is hard to tell who is being spoken about.

Bible translations have a lot to answer for in misleading people about the nature of God and his relationship to his only begotten son. Nowhere in all of scripture did Jesus ever claim to be God or to even have any sort of equality with him. He directed all glory to his Father who was also his God.

Remember too that to Greeks, who had multiple gods, there was no term that identified their gods individually except their name. The Jews had long since stopped using the divine name, (Yahweh, Jehovah) so the ambiguous title "LORD" came to be substituted and the word "God" in Greek simply meant a divine might one.
Confusion over the identity of the one whose title was "Lord" soon merged the Lord Jesus Christ with the Lord Jehovah.

In Exodus 3:15 in the KJV it is rendered...."And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, the Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations."

The same scripture in the ASV reads...."And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations."

Which rendering is more accurate? Obviously it was God's name that was the important point here....the KJV eliminated the divine name and substituted a title. The ASV did not, but stayed true to the text where the divine name was clearly there.

It makes you wonder why the KJV used the divine name at Psalm 83:18 but not at Exodus 3:15? Who decided where the divine name should and should not be used? The NWT solved that problem by putting God's name back in all the scriptures where it belongs.

First of all way before the old testament scriptures were written in Greek, The old testament scriptures were written in Hebrew by the scribes of Israel.

And then after the death of Jesus Christ on the cross, Then the new testament and the old testament scriptures were starting to be written in Greek.

As for those who did the Translation of the Hebrew and Greek language into English.
They did the best they could with what tools they had to Translate the Hebrew and Greek language into English.
What makes you think, those Translators have alot to answer for, some words got lost in Translation, but we to day have the necessary tools to translate words, Unto which those who Translated Hebrew and Greek language into English, did Not have the necessary tools that we have to day.

We have to day, The Strong's Concordance to Translate the Hebrew and Greek language into English, So if you choose to be lazy and not use the necessary tools that are at your disposal, that's no one's fault but your own fault.

Now as for Christ Jesus claiming to have any equality to God ?

You make it easy to show you have little understanding, If none at all about Christ Jesus as being God and the Son of God.

In the book of Mark you will find the high Priest questioning Jesus ---- "But he held his peace, and answered nothing, Again
the high Priest asked him, And said unto him, Art you the Christ , The Son of the Blessed? And Jesus said, I am"
Mark 14:61,62.

And in the book of John --"These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come;
glorify your Son, that your Son also may glorify you" John 17:1.

In the book of John, you find Jesus claiming to be God the Father.

Jesus speaking saying --- "If you had known me, you should have known my Father also: And from here forward you know Him, And have seen Him"
John 14:6,7.

Therefore you have Jesus claiming to be God the Father.
When disciple Philip ask Jesus to show them the Father, Not realizing when they were looking at Jesus, They were actually seeing God the Father standing there right before them.
 

Bro Rando

Member
Praised be {Jehovah} the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, (1 Peter 1:3) Jesus spoke these things, and raising his eyes to heaven, he said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your son so that your son may glorify you, (John 17:1) This means everlasting life, their coming to know YOU, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. (John 17:3) I have made your name manifest to the men whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours, and you gave them to me, and they have observed your word. (John 17:6) I have given them the glory that you have given me, in order that they may be one just as we are one. (John 17:22) Righteous Father, the world has, indeed, not come to know you, but I know you, and these have come to know that you sent me.  I have made your name known to them and will make it known, so that the love with which you loved me may be in them and I in union with them.” (John 17:25-26)

You must pray, then, this way: “Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified.  Let your Kingdom come. Let your will take place, as in heaven, also on earth.” (Matthew 6:9-10) Go in through the narrow gate, because broad is the gate and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are going in through it;  whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are finding it. (Matthew 17:13-14) Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father. (Mark 13:32) For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, a man, Christ Jesus, (1 Timothy 2:5) Jesus said to him: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6) No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him,and I will resurrect him on the last day. (John 6:44)

“That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.”
 

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
Praised be {Jehovah} the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, (1 Peter 1:3) Jesus spoke these things, and raising his eyes to heaven, he said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your son so that your son may glorify you, (John 17:1) This means everlasting life, their coming to know YOU, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. (John 17:3) I have made your name manifest to the men whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours, and you gave them to me, and they have observed your word. (John 17:6) I have given them the glory that you have given me, in order that they may be one just as we are one. (John 17:22) Righteous Father, the world has, indeed, not come to know you, but I know you, and these have come to know that you sent me.  I have made your name known to them and will make it known, so that the love with which you loved me may be in them and I in union with them.” (John 17:25-26)

You must pray, then, this way: “Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified.  Let your Kingdom come. Let your will take place, as in heaven, also on earth.” (Matthew 6:9-10) Go in through the narrow gate, because broad is the gate and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are going in through it;  whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are finding it. (Matthew 17:13-14) Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father. (Mark 13:32) For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, a man, Christ Jesus, (1 Timothy 2:5) Jesus said to him: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6) No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him,and I will resurrect him on the last day. (John 6:44)

“That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.”

Now that's quite funny, seeing in the book of Revelation God foretold,, what is happening in that day and hour.

You must be a JWs right. Seeing your saying things that do not line up to the KJV 1611 bible.
 

Bro Rando

Member
Now that's quite funny, seeing in the book of Revelation God foretold,, what is happening in that day and hour.

You must be a JWs right. Seeing your saying things that do not line up to the KJV 1611 bible.


Only Satan would mock the words of Jesus Christ. "Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father." (Mark 13:32)
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Only Satan would mock the words of Jesus Christ. "Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father." (Mark 13:32)
Let us think that you have not heard about 1975.
":From 1966 to 1975, the Watchtower regularly implied that Armageddon would arrive in 1975. However, ask one of Jehovah's Witnesses about this date and they will invariably deny there ever being such statements. The following exhaustive list of quotes show the Watchtower left little to the imagination regarding 1975."

The idea that 1975 would witness the end of the world was first introduced in 1966.

"The published timetable resulting from this independent study gives the date of man's creation as 4026 B.C.E. According to this trustworthy Bible chronology six thousand years from man's creation will end in 1975, and the seventh period of a thousand years of human history will begin in the fall of 1975 C.E. So six thousand years of man's existence on earth will soon be up, yes, within this generation. So in not many years within our own generation we are reaching what Jehovah God could view as the seventh day of man's existence. How appropriate it would be for Jehovah God to make of this coming seventh period of a thousand years a sabbath period of rest and release, a great Jubilee sabbath for the proclaiming of liberty throughout the earth to all its inhabitants! This would be most timely for mankind. It would also be most fitting on God's part, for, remember, mankind has yet ahead of it what the last book of the Holy Bible speaks of as the reign of Jesus Christ over earth for a thousand years, the millennial reign of Christ. It would not be by mere chance or accident but would be according to the loving purpose of Jehovah God for the reign of Jesus Christ, the 'Lord of the Sabbath,' to run parallel with the seventh millennium of man's existence." Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God 1966 pp.26-30

1975 - Watchtower Quotes to show what really was predicted
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
@Bro Rando While you are thinking about that, can you also tell us why if someone leaves the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses it is being said of them that they "have left Jehovah"?
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
It seems to me that the Jehovah's Witness's date of 1975 was only for the Jehovah's Witnesses who were actually paying attention then.
 

Bro Rando

Member
Let us think that you have not heard about 1975.
":From 1966 to 1975, the Watchtower regularly implied that Armageddon would arrive in 1975. However, ask one of Jehovah's Witnesses about this date and they will invariably deny there ever being such statements. The following exhaustive list of quotes show the Watchtower left little to the imagination regarding 1975."

The idea that 1975 would witness the end of the world was first introduced in 1966.

"The published timetable resulting from this independent study gives the date of man's creation as 4026 B.C.E. According to this trustworthy Bible chronology six thousand years from man's creation will end in 1975, and the seventh period of a thousand years of human history will begin in the fall of 1975 C.E. So six thousand years of man's existence on earth will soon be up, yes, within this generation. So in not many years within our own generation we are reaching what Jehovah God could view as the seventh day of man's existence. How appropriate it would be for Jehovah God to make of this coming seventh period of a thousand years a sabbath period of rest and release, a great Jubilee sabbath for the proclaiming of liberty throughout the earth to all its inhabitants! This would be most timely for mankind. It would also be most fitting on God's part, for, remember, mankind has yet ahead of it what the last book of the Holy Bible speaks of as the reign of Jesus Christ over earth for a thousand years, the millennial reign of Christ. It would not be by mere chance or accident but would be according to the loving purpose of Jehovah God for the reign of Jesus Christ, the 'Lord of the Sabbath,' to run parallel with the seventh millennium of man's existence." Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God 1966 pp.26-30

1975 - Watchtower Quotes to show what really was predicted

AS you can see by your own quotes the Watchtower never made the claim now did they? Want Your Questions Answered?
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
AS you can see by your own quotes the Watchtower never made the claim now did they? Want Your Questions Answered?
Isn't it just semantics? Saying something isn't much unless saying something gets people to behave differently.
Isn't that they got people to behave a certain way the real issue?
They could have said one sentence. The end will be in 1975.
Or, they could hide that sentence in many, many words and orders.
Didn't they do that?

Remember, liars will not get God's gifts. Right?

Anyway, we are off topic. I didn't start it. :D
 

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
Only Satan would mock the words of Jesus Christ. "Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father." (Mark 13:32)


Maybe you should get to know the book of Revelation, before you say anything.
God has given in the book of Revelation,
As to what happens in that day and hour.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
First of all way before the old testament scriptures were written in Greek, The old testament scriptures were written in Hebrew by the scribes of Israel.

True. Since the Jews spoke Hebrew, why would their scriptures be written in any other language? In their own land, they did not fraternize with Gentiles, but kept themselves separated. God's law forbade marriage and interfaith with pagans. Only after the diaspora did Jews become dispersed into other nations and many lost their native language as a result. This was the reason why the holy spirit empowered the disciples to speak in foreign languages, so that Jews coming to Jerusalem for their festivals could hear the good news preached in their own language.

And then after the death of Jesus Christ on the cross, Then the new testament and the old testament scriptures were starting to be written in Greek.

The Christian Greek scriptures were written about Jesus. Koine Greek was the common language of the day, but many Jews still spoke Hebrew. The scriptures read in the synagogues were probably written in Hebrew, but it was in Alexandria that the Greek Septuagint, the first translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, was made. It was produced by Alexandrian Jews, evidently beginning during the reign of Ptolemy (II) Philadelphus (285-246 B.C.E.) so the Hebrew Scriptures were already translated into Greek well before Jesus arrived on the earthly scene.

What makes you think, those Translators have alot to answer for, some words got lost in Translation, but we to day have the necessary tools to translate words, Unto which those who Translated Hebrew and Greek language into English, did Not have the necessary tools that we have to day.

The words may change as language inevitably does, but the KJV was one of the most biased translations towards the trinity.
e.g. John 1:18 KJV "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."

The ASV also renders that verse the same way....

"No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."

But in the Greek it says.....18 θεὸν God οὐδεὶς no one ἑώρακεν has seen πώποτε· at any time; μονογενὴς only-begotten θεὸς god the (one) ὢν being εἰς into τὸν the κόλπον bosom τοῦ of the πατρὸς Father ἐκεῖνος that (one) ἐξηγήσατο explained.

The correct rendering is "only begotten god" not "only begotten Son" in that verse. Think about what the translators did by mistranslating that verse, especially in view of John 1:1. If they rendered the correct word "god" in verse 1, then it should also have been rendered "god" in verse 18. If you switch the order and translate verse 1 as "the Word was the Son" then there is no trinity. Conversely, if you understand the meaning of the word "god" in Greek, it refers to a divine mighty one, not specifically the one God of Israel. Since "the only true God" (John 17:3) cannot be "begotten", it left the translators in a quandary.....so they took liberties with the rendering to support their trinity even if it meant altering the words.

It also says clearly that "no man has seen God at any time"....yet thousands of people saw Jesus.

For someone who purports to know scripture, you demonstrate that your knowledge is very selective.

We have to day, The Strong's Concordance to Translate the Hebrew and Greek language into English, So if you choose to be lazy and not use the necessary tools that are at your disposal, that's no one's fault but your own fault.

I use Strongs often to demonstrate the flaws in many translations.
Laziness comes from not doing your research deeply enough.

In the book of John, you find Jesus claiming to be God the Father.

In the book of John we find Jesus stating the only designation he ever declared...that he was "the son of God". Not once did Jesus ever state that he was God or that he was in any way equal to his God and Father. Even in heaven, the Father is still the God of Jesus. (Revelation 3:12) So unless the three headed god worships parts of himself, the trinity is a nonsense....adopted by an apostate church centuries after Jesus died.

Therefore you have Jesus claiming to be God the Father.

No you don't. He never once claimed to be the Father, but always stressed the superiority of his God and teacher.
When the devil tempted him by offering him all the kingdoms of the world....what did Jesus say? "And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." (Luke 4:8KJV)

By saying "it is written" Jesus was making reference to the OT and the verse he was quoting contained the Tetragrammaton. So he was directing worship to his Father, Jehovah, not himself.

When disciple Philip ask Jesus to show them the Father, Not realizing when they were looking at Jesus, They were actually seeing God the Father standing there right before them.

Please consider the words of the apostle Paul.....in Hebrews 1:1-4 KJV.

"God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they."


"The Logos" is "The Word" or spokesman for Jehovah. He is his representative and "the express image" of his Father. An image is a reflection of the real thing, not the real thing itself. You can see your reflection in a mirror, but it isn't you.

How does God make a part of himself better than the angels and give himself a more excellent name?
Can you see how ridiculous that is?

I can see your sincerity but I believe that you are misguided in your understanding of many things. This is what usually happens when people try to work things out for themselves. God does not work through individuals; he has always appointed human leaders among his people, so those who find themselves alone in their worship should ask themselves why they are alone when they should be surrounded by those who speak in agreement with them. (1 Corinthians 1:10)
 
Last edited:

Bick

Member
Most English Bibles (KJV, NIV etc) say “the Word was God” in John 1:1. However the JW Bible (NWT) says “the Word was a god”. Which is right?

The KJV, NIV are right. The portion quoted in the Greek is in English "God is the Word;" the same God as in the previous sentence, "And the Word with God."
 

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Well
What is the above statement?

It might have been written thus:
God is for the word and the word is for God.

You might be able to imagine that it is possible for someone to be for something, but that something that they believe they are for does not reciprocate.

I think that John 1:1 is about reciprocation.[/QUOWell it's about the logos pretty simple actually.
 

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
It's all
It's goes like this, if people really understands the bible, they will be the first to notice a word Changed.
But for those who are not skilled in the bible, will not detect a word Changed.

That's what the JWs did in John 1:1
They added the ( A) meaning any God

Look if I was to ask you for (A) pencil, that would mean any pencil would do.

But I ask you for (the) pencil, I'm asking for a Pacific pencil and not just any pencil.

Therefore by JWs adding the letter (A) this changes the whole context of what
John 1:1 is actually saying.

Therefore saying, The word was A God. Could be any Good would do.

But to have it say, The word was God, thereby pointing to a Pacific God and not any Good, has the JWs would have it.
It's all Rooted in ancient Greek understanding of the logos. So no simple as that.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
It's all

It's all Rooted in ancient Greek understanding of the logos. So no simple as that.

"Logos" is a Greek word that English speaking people do not understand...but "logo" is something we do understand.
A "logo" is used by corporations to identify their brand or organization. When you see that logo, you immediately know what it represents. Jesus Christ was the Logos, or the one who represented God to humankind. "The Word" is translated from "the Logos" because Jesus was Jehovah's spokesman....disseminating God's word to his people.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
The KJV, NIV are right. The portion quoted in the Greek is in English "God is the Word;" the same God as in the previous sentence, "And the Word with God."

The definite article was not used for the Logos in John 1:1...so the NIV and the KJV are not correct.

In one single verse it would be inconsistent to use "the God" for the Father and not use it also for the Word if they were one and the same God.

In Greek it reads...."In ἀρχῇ beginning ἦν wasthe λόγος, Word, καὶ andthe λόγος Word ἦν was πρὸς toward τὸν the θεόν, God, καὶ and θεὸς god ἦν wasthe λόγος Word."

In the second mention of θεὸς (god) there is no definite article. So one is "the" God and the other is just "a" god or 'a divine mighty one'. "God" in Greek doesn't just mean the one God of the Jews....it was given to all the gods of the Greeks who were identified by their names individually and by "the gods" collectively. Greater or lesser still had the same title.

Since John 1:18 says that "no man has seen God at any time" (thousands saw Jesus) and Colossians 1:15 says that Jesus is "the firstborn of all creation" .....so, the beginning of "all creation" was the Word.....the "only begotten god", who was 'the beginning of God's way'. (Proverbs 8:22) Jesus is a creation of his Father. (Revelation 3:14)
 

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
"Logos" is a Greek word that English speaking people do not understand...but "logo" is something we do understand.
A "logo" is used by corporations to identify their brand or organization. When you see that logo, you immediately know what it represents. Jesus Christ was the Logos, or the one who represented God to humankind. "The Word" is translated from "the Logos" because Jesus was Jehovah's spokesman....disseminating God's word to his people.
"Logos is common but everyone seems to have their own private understanding" who said that? I mean you have zero idea how the logos is understood by the textual writer at all. Every, idea, thought, perception, in how you are understanding it is stretched across history long after the text is written. It's nonsense. Now I like church folks I understand why exactly the church or culture or modernity is a bit confused that's called "normal" you are totally "normal". Are you proposing in your "normal" perceptions that someone " normal" wrote that verse? Impossible. Particularly a "normal" 21st century individual. Morphology of language alone predicates that as being literally impossible. So I am not blasting you for your view it's "normal" but it's not the text not even remotely.
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
J2hapydna said in the opening post : “Most English Bibles (KJV, NIV etc) say “the Word was God” in John 1:1. However the JW Bible (NWT) says “the Word was a god”. Which is right?

I’d like to add three points to this conversation :

While I have myself criticized the NWT paraphrase of the bible, I have to agree with the Jehovahs’ Witnesses on the specific point that that their translation of the Greek text in John 1:1 is perfectly correct.

1) THE ANCIENT CONTEXT, AND ONLY CONTEXT DETERMINES THE CORRECT TRANSLATION OF THIS PHRASE
The Greek of John 1:1, third phrase reads : “… και θεος ην ο λογος.” This can be correctly translated EITHER “and the Word was God” OR “and the Word was A God”. It is ONLY the ancient historical context that determines which of the two translations was meant by its author.


2) TO WRITE “THE WORD WAS ‘A’ GOD”, one must use the phrase the author of John 1:1 used.
If one wants (specifically) to write “AND THE WORD WAS A GOD” then the ONLY way to write this in Koine Greek IS : “και θεος ην ο λογος”. (other than word order which may change in greek) This IS the exact text given us by the Greek text and there are no alternate reading in any known, significant Greek manuscript (NA-27 and GN4 list none) for this phrase of John 1:1.

Is there any greek reader on this entire forum which can write this phrase differently? (other than word order)


3) DID THE AUTHOR INTENTIONALLY OMIT THE ARTICLE?

The pattern of using and omitting the article is interesting :
IN accordance with normal Grammar, in the first phrase, "Εν αρχη ην ο λογος" the article is present. Thus the subject is THE Word (Not “A” Word, but “THE” Word).

The second phrase reads “Και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον”, the article is present for both nouns.

Thus it means “and THE word” was with THE God. (Not “A” word or “a” God, but “THE” word and “THE” God.)

The third phrase reads “και θεος ην ο λογος.”

Which reads grammatically “and a God was the word”, but English requires the noun first so we say it means “and THE word was A God”. Grammatically this is perfectly correct. It is only the theological context which determines if the author MEANT “A” or “THE” God.


THE CURIOUS PATTERN OF ARTICLE USE

The author purposefully specifies “THE” word in the first phrase, and he included both articles in the second phrase (THE word and THE God) and uses the article for “THE” word in the third phrase but he omits the article in front of the word for God. Is this accidental?

He again uses the article in the second sentence (τον θεον – THE god).

Again in verse four he uses the article in indicating “the light of [the] mankind. Since Vaticanus leaves out the article we know that major versions left out the article so we assume the early editors know that in this phrase it is unneeded (there is only one “mankind” so one need not specify “which” mankind by using the article in this phrase…)

In verse 5 the author uses the article three times (το φος / τη σκοτια / η σκοτια αυτο). It seems like th writer understands well the specificity of the article and knows how to use it.

In verse 6 the author leaves out the article in referring to John (there came “A” man” and, he also, omits the article when referring to God (most versions use theos) or to “Lord” (Bezae in this phrase says a man sent from [the] Lord).

My point is that the author of John uses the article both ways (specific and non-specific nouns) and uses it in the first three phrases of John 1:1 but omits it in the last phrase. Is this a mistake or did he revert to less specific language in the last phrase than he used in the first two phrases. We know from verse 6 that he can and does omit the article when referring to [the] God.

In any case, it is only ancient context that can determine whether the writer of John 1:1 meant “and the word was God”, or “and the word was a god”. The grammar itself can be read either way (again, depending upon context).


Clear
φυτωτζω
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Savagewind replied : “So, it doesn’t matter.”


No, it matters a great deal theologically.

While An inarticulated Noun is indefinite, context affects and even overrides this rule of Greek Grammar. So then, one must look for hints from the text to see what context the writer is using. In this case John describes his context. In vs 18 of John Chapter one, the writer makes it clear he is speaking of Jesus as “the only begotten God” who is in the bosom of the Father".

If this verse refers to Jesus who is “in the Bosom of the Father”, and it is Jesus who is “the only begotten God”, and if Jesus is not the Father, then it is speaking of a different being who is described as the “only begotten God who is in the Bosom of the Father”.

I think Deeje was trying to make this profoundly important point in post #51 regarding this verse but readers did not seem to see the significance of this important point.


The GN-4 (the Standard text for translators) of John 1:18 reads :

Θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε μονογενης θεος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο.” (John 1:18) Which means, in english :
No one has ever seen God; [the] only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.” (declared him, explained him, etc.)

Since God the Father was not, historically referred to as a "begotten God", verse 18 cannot refer to him as a "begotten God", but, instead must refer to different individual who was "the only begotten God". In this case, Jesus fits into this position in early Christian textual worldviews, especially given the many descriptions that refer to him as "the only begotten" "of the Father".


I might also point out that the Greek reading of “the only begotten God” in John 1:18, is classified in the GN-4 as “B” text. This means this is almost certainly the original Greek textual reading according to the panel of critical textualists. It is not contested by any scholar on the NA27 panel (so far).

The reading “only begotten God” comes from first order textual witnesses including Uncials B and C. It is found in the immensely important P66; and in Syrian harklensis. It exists in Origens texts “in partim” (meaning this exact quote exists in multiple references by the same person, thus it is not an accidental usage), In fact it exists in Irenaeus AND Clement in partim as well. In fact Clement uses the same quote in “ex theodoto”. Thus these writers used it as an official version. Even Uncial L uses this reading (The only substantial gospels manuscripts better than L are P75, B, and sinaiticus)


John 1, Vs 18 speaks of an “only begotten God who was in the bosom of the Father”. If this was Jesus and Jesus was the word, then Johns’ context is perfectly in line with other early Christian literature. For example, Barnabas says : "For the Scripture speaks about us when he says to the Son: 'Let us make man according to our image and likeness, and let them rule over the beasts of the earth and the birds of the air and the fish of the sea. ' And when he saw that our creation was good, the Lord said : 'Increase and multiply and fill the earth.' These things he said to the Son." (The Epistle of Barnabas 6:12)

The important point is that the context under which John is writing is not modern Judeo-Christian theology or it’s worldviews, but it is written under the early Judeo-Christian theology and it’s worldviews. I think this was partly the point Deeje was trying to make.


Clear
φυδρφυω
 
Last edited:
Top