What did John mean?

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
marco
Savant
Posts: 12314
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2015 3:15 pm
Location: Scotland
Been thanked: 2 times

What did John mean?

Post #1

Post by marco »


User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 22953
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 907 times
Been thanked: 1339 times
Contact:

Re: What did John mean?

Post #11

Post by JehovahsWitness »

marco wrote: .... you've wrapped your arguments in a cloak of grammatical reasoning, inaccessible to the majority.
Emphasis MINE

You claim tigger has {qoute} "warped" his arguments implying that what he is saying is distorted and thus are by necessity an inaccurate reflection of what is true. Can you substaneate this claim with anything but axiom? What should his (unwarped) argument be and how are you in authority to say?

JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8667
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2257 times
Been thanked: 2370 times

Re: What did John mean?

Post #12

Post by Tcg »

JehovahsWitness wrote:
marco wrote: .... you've wrapped your arguments in a cloak of grammatical reasoning, inaccessible to the majority.
Emphasis MINE

You claim tigger has {qoute} "warped" his arguments implying that what he is saying is distorted and thus are by necessity an inaccurate reflection of what is true.
It is odd that even after emphasizing the word, "wrapped", you then {misquote} the very word you emphasized. You {quote} is as "warped".

Is there a deliberate reason for this {misquote} or did you simply make an error in reading the post as it is written?

User avatar
marco
Savant
Posts: 12314
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2015 3:15 pm
Location: Scotland
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: What did John mean?

Post #13

Post by marco »

By Grace wrote:

Are you perhaps aware that the early Greek manuscripts were all written in unicals, meaning capital letters, and had nothing that resembles modern punctuation?

Are you aware that the translators capitalised not because capitals were used in the original but because they deferred to God and capitalised his name, twice, as he was referred to twice.

You are doubtless awre of the following attempts at translation:

New International Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

New Living Translation
In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.

English Standard Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Berean Study Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Berean Literal Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

New American Standard Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

King James Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Christian Standard Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Contemporary English Version
In the beginning was the one who is called the Word. The Word was with God and was truly God.

Good News Translation
In the beginning the Word already existed; the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

International Standard Version
In the beginning, the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.

NET Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God.

New Heart English Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
In the origin The Word had been existing and That Word had been existing with God and That Word was himself God.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.

New American Standard 1977
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Jubilee Bible 2000
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and the Word was God.

King James 2000 Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

American King James Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

American Standard Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Douay-Rheims Bible
IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Darby Bible Translation
In [the] beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

English Revised Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Webster's Bible Translation
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Weymouth New Testament
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

World English Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Young's Literal Translation
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;




I am in no position to contest the veracity of the above translations, but if the exercise here is to revisit English renderings of Biblical passages, then I humbly submit that my qualifications are unequal to this task. I am specifically dealing with the text that the vast majority accept.
By Grace wrote:
What you seem to be not understanding, as I have explained this to you before is that John 1:1 is what we in English call a PREDICATE NOMINATIVE, which is a renaming of the subject, "word" in the predicate (second part) of the sentence, following a form of the verb "be".
Well we in English call this a complement after the verb "to be", though factitive verbs can enjoy a complement too. When a preposition is used inflected languages obligingly decline the noun for the appropriate case ending. In some languages I've studied, there is in fact no verb to be in the present tense nor articles. I feel my understanding can cope with your grammatical labour, which is hardly slaying the Nemean lion. However, I have said we are discussing God, which the many translations prefer,not a god. Those who want to comment on the OP have simply to read John as most read him and decide if Jesus emerges as God from that. Or indeed unravel sense from John's message!

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 15312
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 980 times
Been thanked: 1812 times
Contact:

Re: What did John mean?

Post #14

Post by William »

[Replying to post 11 by marco]
New International Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

New Living Translation
In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.

English Standard Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Berean Study Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Berean Literal Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

New American Standard Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

King James Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Christian Standard Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Contemporary English Version
In the beginning was the one who is called the Word. The Word was with God and was truly God.

Good News Translation
In the beginning the Word already existed; the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

International Standard Version
In the beginning, the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.

NET Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God.

New Heart English Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
In the origin The Word had been existing and That Word had been existing with God and That Word was himself God.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.

New American Standard 1977
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Jubilee Bible 2000
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and the Word was God.

King James 2000 Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

American King James Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

American Standard Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Douay-Rheims Bible
IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Darby Bible Translation
In [the] beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

English Revised Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Webster's Bible Translation
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Weymouth New Testament
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

World English Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Young's Literal Translation
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;

I get the impression from the above, that GOD and 'the Word' are the same. The 'word' is not sourced 'elsewhere'. The 'beginning' may refer to how the beginning came about 'because GOD spoke' The words GOD spoke, were 'of GOD' coming 'from GOD' and indistinguishable from that perspective. GOD and what GOD speaks are one and the same.

If I think something, then 'the thought is with me' If I speak that thought, then the words are from the thoughts that are with me. However, not all my thoughts are directly sourced with me. I get them from many places, but they are at least processed through me, so when I speak them they are still 'of me', but not in the same way that this passage is referring to.

Before the beginning of any thing, there was only GOD, and all that has to do with that, including GODs thoughts and words.

Indeed, perhaps GODs thoughts are GODs words.

User avatar
marco
Savant
Posts: 12314
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2015 3:15 pm
Location: Scotland
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: What did John mean?

Post #15

Post by marco »

William wrote:

If I think something, then 'the thought is with me'
As a boy I had to recite the Latin: In principio verbum erat et Verbum erat apud Deum et Deus erat verbum. Order of words, in general, does not change the meaning. The word "apud" for with, instead of cum, is surprising and usually means "at the home of"; so the Vulgate translators took the meaning to be that the word resided with God. God was the reason or source of all meaning in the beginning. The discussions around the meaning of logos are fascinating, and inconclusive.

Jesus was the incarnation of this word; he walked around disseminating truth and saw himself as the metaphorical Truth in that his speech reflected what God prescribed; he obtained all power and authority from God, though he wasn't God of course, just the conveyor of the logos.

.

polonius
Prodigy
Posts: 3904
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:03 pm
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 1 time

Jesus had a beginning in time

Post #16

Post by polonius »


bjs
Prodigy
Posts: 3222
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 4:29 pm

Re: What did John mean?

Post #17

Post by bjs »

Understand that you might believe. Believe that you might understand. –Augustine of Hippo

User avatar
tigger2
Sage
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 4:32 pm
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: What did John mean?

Post #18

Post by tigger2 »


User avatar
marco
Savant
Posts: 12314
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2015 3:15 pm
Location: Scotland
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: What did John mean?

Post #19

Post by marco »

tigger2 wrote:



......................................

It is not surprising that trinitarian scholars would prefer the 'God' translation at John 1:1c and ignore any other honest alternate.
I don't think we need to accuse the other side of dishonesty in preferring their translation. I can reach your conclusion without becoming steeped in grammatical considerations. In the beginning was the Word. That is God's reasoning incorporating his primal pronouncements.


And the word was with God: logos belonged entirely to God;


Then all these qualities constitute God. We say God is Love in a similar way. This is synecdoche, a part representing the whole. Or we can see it as metonymy, where related qualities are stated instead of God. The crown is in danger means the monarchy is in danger.


Then we move to Jesus conveying an aspect of God to earth, and allowing people to interact with God's word, through him. He is the vector of God's word; and we have said that God IS the logos, figuratively.


In this way Jesus himself becomes Truth or some abstract quality normally resident in God. He says he is the Way, the Truth and the Life - when he means he is the vector of these attributes.

Jesus by close association becomes that truth which we identify as God; but of course he is not literally God, just a conveyor of God's word. And that word, that principle of reason, existed before Abraham ever was. As the Truth, Jesus existed before Abraham..... in a figurative manner.

There's no need for deifications or Trinities; just figures of speech.

And your conclusion is mine,.

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 22953
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 907 times
Been thanked: 1339 times
Contact:

Re: What did John mean?

Post #20

Post by JehovahsWitness »

INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

Post Reply