1. 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 Discussion

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Bryan X, Aug 13, 2004.

  1. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Jun 11, 2013
    It does not say holy spirit.
  2. rusra02

    rusra02 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Jan 24, 2009
    “No one has seen God ever." Like I said. As to John 1:1, I think this quote is enlightening: "The Gospel of John was written in Koine, or common Greek, which has specific rules regarding the use of the definite article. Bible scholar A. T. Robertson recognizes that if both subject and predicate have articles, “both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable.” Robertson considers as an example Matthew 13:38, which reads: “The field [Greek, ho a·grosʹ] is the world [Greek, ho koʹsmos].” The grammar enables us to understand that the world is also the field.

    What, though, if the subject has a definite article but the predicate does not, as in John 1:1? Citing that verse as an example, scholar James Allen Hewett emphasizes: “In such a construction the subject and predicate are not the same, equal, identical, or anything of the sort.”

    To illustrate, Hewett uses 1 John 1:5, which says: “God is light.” In Greek, “God” is ho the·osʹ and therefore has a definite article. But phos for “light” is not preceded by any article. Hewett points out: “One can always . . . say of God He is characterized by light; one cannot always say of light that it is God.” Similar examples are found at John 4:24, “God is a Spirit,” and at 1 John 4:16, “God is love.” In both of these verses, the subjects have definite articles but the predicates, “Spirit” and “love,” do not. So the subjects and predicates are not interchangeable. These verses cannot mean that “Spirit is God” or “love is God.” (w09 4/1)
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Hockeycowboy

    Hockeycowboy Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Oct 28, 2015
    Check out these versions of John 1:1….

    ▪ 1808: "and the Word was a god" – Thomas Belsham The New Testament, in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text, London.

    ▪ 1822: "and the Word was a god" – The New Testament in Greek and English (A. Kneeland, 1822.)

    ▪ 1829: "and the Word was a god" – The Monotessaron; or, The Gospel History According to the Four Evangelists (J. S. Thompson, 1829)

    ▪ 1863: "and the Word was a god" – A Literal Translation of the New Testament (Herman Heinfetter [Pseudonym of Frederick Parker], 1863)

    ▪ 1864: "the LOGOS was God, This was in the Beginning with God" – A New Emphatic Version (right hand column)

    ▪ 1864: "and a god was the Word" – The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson, New York and London (left hand column interlinear reading)

    ▪ 1879: "and the Word was a god" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes (J. Becker, 1979)

    ▪ 1885: "and the Word was a god" – Concise Commentary on The Holy Bible (R. Young, 1885)

    ▪ 1911: "and the Word was a god" – The Coptic Version of the N.T. (G. W. Horner, 1911)

    ▪ 1935: "and the Word was divine" – The Bible: An American Translation, by John M. P. Smith and Edgar J. Goodspeed, Chicago

    ▪ 1955: "so the Word was divine" – The Authentic New Testament, by Hugh J. Schonfield, Aberdeen.

    ▪ 1956: "In the beginning the Word was existing. And the Word was in fellowship with God the Father. And the Word was as to His essence absolute deity" – The Wuest Expanded Translation[15]

    ▪ 1958: "and the Word was a god" – The New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Anointed (J. L. Tomanec, 1958)

    ▪ 1966, 2001: "...and he was the same as God" – The Good News Bible

    ▪ 1970, 1989: "...and what God was, the Word was" – The Revised English Bible

    ▪ 1975 "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word" – Das Evangelium nach Johnnes, by Siegfried Schulz, Göttingen, Germany

    ▪ 1975: "and the Word was a god" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes (S. Schulz, 1975);

    ▪ 1978: "and godlike sort was the Logos" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider, Berlin

    Some use the term "divine." (1) Trinitarian Moffatt's highly acclaimed New Translation of the Bible and (2) trinitarian Smith-Goodspeed's An American Translation both say that the Word "was divine." The translations by (3) Boehmer, (4) Stage, and (5) Menge all say the Word was "of divine being." (6) John J. McKenzie, S. J., writes in his Dictionary of the Bible: "Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated `the word was with the God (equals the Father), and the word was a divine being.'" - p. 317, Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., 1965, published with Catholic Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur.
  4. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    May 9, 2012
    " John 1:1 "

    The verse "John 1:1 " is not* from (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah, please. Right?
    The followers of Yeshua must quote first , for a meaningful discussion/debate verse/verses from Yeshua where he had in a straightforward , unequivocal and unambiguous manner made a claim and given gist of reason, and then the discussion debate be made within the purview of such verses, not the vice a versa, please, right?
    Else, there is every chance that one would be misled most certainly, please, right?

    *Holy Bible King James Version (Red Letter Edition)
    The Roman Catholic Holy Bible with the words of Jesus in red.
    World Messianic Bible