John 1:1 revisited ton usage

[brianbbs67]

Couldn't find the John 1:1 thread. So added this. I am a novice at beast, with Kione. But, I have been reading about the use of "ton". It seems else where in the scripture, it translated as "of the". Example, Acts 20:7 "mia ton Sabbaton", one of the Sabbaths(mia could also mean first, I hear). Why is it not "of the" in J 1:1? Ie, "and the word was of the God"?

[marco]

Hence, the Coptic translation supplies interesting evidence as to how John 1:1 would have been understood back then. What do we find? The Sahidic Coptic translation uses an indefinite article with the word “god� in the final part of John 1:1.

That's a very informative post. The problem with the conclusion is that whether we like it or not, the original Greek is without an article and we are left with a translator's decision. It may have been that those who translated were not opposed to the idea of gods, or minor deities. We then have to labour more over "a god" and take it adjectivally as "divine," which moves away from the theos of the original. One objection to your line of argument is the proximity of "with God " and the next mention of God/ god. It would seem that the writer is moving to a climactic statement rather than a bland description of the word...... as divine.


Much doubt remains.

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 11 by marco]

You are right, much doubt remains. If pushed to a definitive answer, I would go with the indefinite article. That is not set in stone, though. This stuff is like unwrapping an onion, layer by layer, better not miss a layer, either.