John 1:1 Part 2

The translation and interpretation of this most disputed passage.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Christology
• John 1:1
• Jesus
• Jehovah
• Bible
• New Testament
• Trinity

[DixonDA]

Very well done! Your treatment of alternative understandings is fair and your conclusions are compelling. Are you familiar with the author Patrick Navas?

--Danny Andre' Dixon, Moderator, Disciples for One God (Yahoo Discussion Group)

[scripturaltruths]

@DixonDA Thanks Danny.  Patrick is a friend.

[CRoadwarrior]

Dave...you really need to stop pretending to know Greek and start learning the language.  Arguing about a language you don't know, just to support Watchtower doctrine, is nonsense.

[scripturaltruths]

@CRoadwarrior Great, I can then look forward to a full response. If I'm pretending that should be easy enough.

[egwpisteuw]

To me, this has always been a very strange argument that JWs make. If you take θεος as indefinite in John1:1, isn't this Polytheism? The natural sense of John 1 is mathematically:

the Word = God; Jesus = the Word; thus Jesus = God

If you make θεος in verse 1 indefinite, you have destroyed the entire mathematical beauty of the equation and rendered the Apostle's message meaningless...

[scripturaltruths]

@egwpisteuw It isn't polytheism anymore than the biblical identification of angels as gods is polytheism. The Jews referred to various exalted beings as gods without issue.

[bandaidmafia]

Great study my friend! Very informative, thanks for posting.

God bless.

[DixonDA]

@MrZetterlund777

You seem to misunderstand that there is more going on here than Greek grammar. First of all, Jesus himself points out that the word THEOS is capable of being understood more broadly than simply to mean God as in God the Father Almighty. In John 10:30-36, for example, he makes reference to Psalm 82:6 where God himself refers to men as "gods," and Jesus points out that he is only, in context, willing to call himself God's Son,

[bluefish704]

@CRoadwarrior I know the language and I can very well verify that his exegisis is fine. And if anyone who knows greek were to read. . . "Εν αρχή, ην ο Λόγος και ο Λόγος ην προς/παρά τον/τω Θεόν/ω και Θ/θεός ην ο Λόγος", they would, even intuatively, recognise a difference in the sense that θεός is being used in b and c. The absense of a definite article is just too blunt. Plus, taking into account the fact that the early Sahidic text renders c with an indefinite article and, oh well.

[Lad24LFC]

@MrZetterlund777

When trying to understand what Jesus meant by saying "I and the father are one" take into account the context. Check John 14:20. This shed light on the matter. It indicates not a literal sense of being that person but one of "Wills" or Union.

[scripturaltruths]

@MrZetterlund777 But the word one is neuter, not masculine, so it is not saying they are one person. Similarly, Paul says "He that plants and he that waters are one," speaking with reference to himself and Apollos. He was not saying they are one person either.