Presumably (according to Christianity). This is not a debate thread. I'm merely wondering about word-choice.
-
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!
@Harel13 An interesting parallel verse to consider, from later in John's gospel, when explicating the opening line of the prologue is I think John 8:58:
This verse uses different tenses of the exact same terms genesthai "came into being / came to be" and eimi "am" (en "was") that are used in the prologue.
In most translations - such as the NRSV and KJV - genesthai is in this verse is rendered: "before Abraham was" (in the NIV, "before Abraham was born") because it is in the past tense (referring to a coming into being in time at some point in the past).
But Jesus, on the other hand, is never referred to with any tense of the verb ginomai (except when the prologue says, "the Word became (egeneto) flesh" for when He entered into time in a mortal body/tabernacle).
In the prologue, the Word isn't described as "In the beginning was (genesthai) the Word" (which would mean, the Word came into being in the beginning) but rather "In the beginning was (en) the Word" using the imperfect past continuous tense of eimi (am).
Compare with Abraham in this verse: as a creature, a created being who came into existence at some point in time, he is ginomai/genesthai. The Word incarnate in Jesus, on the other hand, is eimi/en - that is to say, he simply is according to the author, an eternally subsisting and pre-existing 'being' that never came into being within time.
The statement by John here is explicitly designed to imitate and allude to classic affirmations of the unique and eternally abiding being of God from the LXX (Septuagint) versions of the Tanakh:
The Greek sentence above is reflective of the exact same grammatical structure as John 8:58 and relies upon precisely the same verbs in drawing the same contrast between that which was created/came into being in time (thus finite) and that which is uncreated/did not come into being in time but is eternal.
This same underlying 'schema' and verb pattern underpins much of the theology of the entirety of John, not merely the prologue (which sets the stage for the author's argument).
εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Ἰησοῦς· ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί.
(Literally) "Jesus said to them: "Truly, before Abraham came into being (γενέσθαι genesthai), I am (ego eimi)". So they picked up stones to throw at him"
(Literally) "Jesus said to them: "Truly, before Abraham came into being (γενέσθαι genesthai), I am (ego eimi)". So they picked up stones to throw at him"
This verse uses different tenses of the exact same terms genesthai "came into being / came to be" and eimi "am" (en "was") that are used in the prologue.
In most translations - such as the NRSV and KJV - genesthai is in this verse is rendered: "before Abraham was" (in the NIV, "before Abraham was born") because it is in the past tense (referring to a coming into being in time at some point in the past).
But Jesus, on the other hand, is never referred to with any tense of the verb ginomai (except when the prologue says, "the Word became (egeneto) flesh" for when He entered into time in a mortal body/tabernacle).
In the prologue, the Word isn't described as "In the beginning was (genesthai) the Word" (which would mean, the Word came into being in the beginning) but rather "In the beginning was (en) the Word" using the imperfect past continuous tense of eimi (am).
Compare with Abraham in this verse: as a creature, a created being who came into existence at some point in time, he is ginomai/genesthai. The Word incarnate in Jesus, on the other hand, is eimi/en - that is to say, he simply is according to the author, an eternally subsisting and pre-existing 'being' that never came into being within time.
The statement by John here is explicitly designed to imitate and allude to classic affirmations of the unique and eternally abiding being of God from the LXX (Septuagint) versions of the Tanakh:
"Before the mountains came into being [genethenai, the passive form of genesthai] and the earth and the world were formed, even from age to age, you are [su ei, the second-person equivalent of ego eimi "I am"]" (Psalm 90:2 [89:2 in the LXX]).
The Greek sentence above is reflective of the exact same grammatical structure as John 8:58 and relies upon precisely the same verbs in drawing the same contrast between that which was created/came into being in time (thus finite) and that which is uncreated/did not come into being in time but is eternal.
This same underlying 'schema' and verb pattern underpins much of the theology of the entirety of John, not merely the prologue (which sets the stage for the author's argument).
cataway
Well-Known Member
perhaps if pertinent scripture is also applied
col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible.....
being first born means he was before all other things
Fascinating.
There's of course a vast difference when you, a JW, answers, and when another Christian answers...
lostwanderingsoul
Well-Known Member
Both the Father and the Word are eternal beings and have always existed.
Actually, Ken, your link doesn't counter it at all. I think I read it accurately. It presents both sides. 3 sides, really.
My question is not about that either.
Wouldn't it be wise to judge the content of the post, it's accuracy, rather than judge the author of it?
JW's worship only Yahweh, following Jesus' example.... That does sometimes make JW answers different.
cataway
Well-Known Member
there is other scripter that also applies proverbs 8:22
''Jehovah produced me as the beginning of his way,
The earliest of his achievements of long ago.
23 From ancient times I was installed,
From the start, from times earlier than the earth.''
it is safe to say the Word/Jesus has been for a very long time
lostwanderingsoul
Well-Known Member
OK Sorry
dybmh
דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
... sounds like someone I see in the mirror every morning ...
dybmh
דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
I'm not sure you two are speaking the same language, perhaps it's best to leave it as an unanswered question.
dybmh
דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
EXACTLY!!!!
After reading some comments, I felt it necessary to add this fact....even Satan is called "the god" at 2 Corinthians 4:4, so looking at context is always important! Saying "god" in Greek, simply implied a powerful one. Even Paul recognized there were "many gods", @ 1 Corinthians 8:5-6.
I didn't realize! Thanks, Rival. Hope you're doing well.
Terry Sampson
Well-Known Member
Unless and until ....Fascinating.
I've read that R. Jacob Joseph of Polonoy wrote, in the Toledot Yaakov Yosef,
- "And Moses was distinguished from all other prophets by one other quality, namely... that the Shechina itself spoke through his throat. This rank also may be reached by every Israelite after he had sanctified himself with God's holiness."
Likewise, I say, when Jesus spoke. So, when the author wrote that Jesus said: "Before Abraham was, I am", I ask: who was talking? The added challenge today, in 2020, is that the words are print on paper.
Actually, you are correct. I stopped at "One late well known critic, William Barclay, Bible translator and commentator, even saying that such a rendering as, "and the Word was a god," is "grammatically impossible."
my error.
So let me attack it differently:
Acts 28:6
- he was a God
John 1:1
He WAS God
You have to have consistency if you are going to interpret that way.
Here is the site for the opposite view.
John 1:1, "The word was a god" | CARM.org