- This topic has 3,161 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (Colter @ Nov. 26 2012,12:41) The phrase “in the beginning” is a poetic, philosophical concession. God had no beginning, neither did The Son or the Creator Son, Jesus. They are ancestral to, but eternal-with, God the Father. Colter
It is meaning 'in the beginning of creation', i.e. of the world, as in Genesis. Genesis and John 1.1 go together.Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 26 2012,14:57) Quote (2besee @ Nov. 26 2012,04:48) Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 26 2012,11:26) 2b Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth… “The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters.”
can you see that there are two beguinings
Terraricca, do you mean two creations?
2b1)Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth… “
2)”The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters.”
what the 6 days means his that the earth was transformed into a home for men to be a god (master)
the earth was created long before God made the changes on earth ,
I feel that 'in the beginning' has another meaning.
I read in Origen that 'in the beginning' and the two accounts of creation has something to do with the first creation of the spiritual side to man (the inner man) and the second creation was the flesh.Just saying.
Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 26 2012,15:24) richt Quote To all: I have been through this for years and I am convinced, (by much studying) that this is truth weather you believe in it or not I don't think I can change unless God shows me different through His Word. how you think God will help you if you cluster yourself in a shell and say that it i am done I know for me thats the truth ,
unless God …..what you have shut yourself up ,this means you have become deff and dum to what ever any one will say ,
wakeup free yourself and understand that all the time of mens life his made to know God his creator ,
how many times did i say what you say and then start over to read the scriptures again and learn new thing find more jewels more diamants ,and perles ,I have never say that again and left religion
This is true, I mean for each of us.Those who think that they know it all, usually know nothing.
Knowing the Father and knowing the Son is actually knowing their will.
Mans doctrines will not save them.
All,
A child could know more than an adult.
Mans supposed intelligence is nothing but evil, without the spirit which is true.
Humility and respect towards God and others, means more to God than does modern day education and intelligence.
The Disciples of Jesus were simple fisherman!
“O Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you.
Avoid the godless chatter and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge,
for by professing it some have missed the mark as regards the faith.
Grace be with you.”Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 27 2012,12:55) Quote (2besee @ Nov. 25 2012,14:01) Mike, I haven't read your above posts yet but i have been thinking. To say that in the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was A God does Not. Seem. Right.
I understand 2B. How could it seem right to you, when you've been so used to the majority translation of that verse for so long?It's like when some new group does a remake of one of my favorite old songs. YUCK! Why did they have to change what was already PERFECT?
This is going to be a good, scriptural discussion………….. if we take baby steps together.
Hi Mike, the spirit tells me that the translation of John 1:1 is correct.IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD, THE WORD WAS WITH GOD AND THE WORD WAS GOD.
Where did you learn your doctrine? From Greek Scholars?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 27 2012,13:13) Quote (2besee @ Nov. 25 2012,15:43) Hi Mike, I am going to “attack” your post on page three bit by bit, tomorrow (when I have some more time) but for now I just have one more post to do:
Okay 2B. But know before you attack, that the vast majority of the post is simply Greek to English grammatical FACTS. There is really nothing to be questioned until you get to my 7 points at the bottom of the post.First and foremost, I want you to agree on these two FACTS of translation:
1. The Greek language did NOT use an indefinite article, and so every “a” you see in the NT was ADDED by an English translator.
Do you accept his FACT? Yes or No?
2. Upon acceptance of the above, you'll also have no choice but to accept that John 1:1c can be translated one of TWO different ways: “God”, or “a god”. The former requires us to add the definite article “THE”, and the latter requires us to add the indefinite article “a”.
Do you accept this FACT? Yes or No?
YES, I accept this fact but,
It is the spirit which teaches us truth – not a theologian!Would you put all of your trust in a theologian, or in God?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 26 2012,05:57) What you may not know is that neither the Hebrew nor the Greek languages use an indefinite article. For example, we in English would say, Today we took a car for a test drive. In Greek, they say, Today we took car for test drive. (Notice the indefinite article “a” is missing in the Greek version.) What that means is that each of the over 8000 times the indefinite article “a” is translated into English Bibles, it has to be ADDED by the translator – as he sees fit.
Here is one from the Greek language:Acts 28:6
The people expected him to swell up or suddenly fall dead, but after waiting a long time and seeing nothing unusual happen to him, they changed their minds and said he was a god.The “a god” at the end could just as faithfully be translated as “God”. We must decide from context whether the people of Malta thought Paul was the one true God, or if he was one of many gods. Most translators assume that the people of Malta didn't know Jehovah, and so ADD the indefinite article “a” into the verse, rendering it as “a god”. But again, it could go either way, depending on what the translator believes was being taught.
So the Greek words in the verse above are really: they changed their minds and said he was god. Now in English, that sounds to us like they thought he was THE God, Jehovah. But in Greek, it could just as easily mean they thought he was “a god”.
Are you with me so far?
I know that.Quote Here is a Hebrew example: Judges 13
21 When the angel of the Lord did not show himself again to Manoah and his wife, Manoah realized that it was the angel of the Lord.22 “We are doomed to die!” he said to his wife. “We have seen God!”
Due to the lack of the indefinite article, we in English have to “guess” if Manoah thought he'd seen God Almighty, or “a god”. And judging from verse 21, which makes it clear that Manoah KNEW it was not God Himself, but an angel of God, I'd say verse 22 deserves a translation of “a god”. But most English translations render it as “God”. Does that make “God” the absolute correct translation, since it could be translated either way?
So then they were calling an Angel 'a god'?
As is in the story of Ishmael, and Hagar,Genisis 16:
[7] The angel of the LORD found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, the spring on the way to Shur.
[8] And he said, “Hagar, maid of Sar'ai, where have you come from and where are you going?” She said, “I am fleeing from my mistress Sar'ai.”
[9] The angel of the LORD said to her, “Return to your mistress, and submit to her.”
[10] The angel of the LORD also said to her, “I will so greatly multiply your descendants that they cannot be numbered for multitude.”
[11] And the angel of the LORD said to her, “Behold, you are with child, and shall bear a son; you shall call his name Ish'mael; because the LORD has given heed to your affliction.
[12] He shall be a wild ass of a man, his hand against every man and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell over against all his kinsmen.”
[13] So she called the name of the LORD who spoke to her, “Thou art a God of seeing”; for she said, “Have I really seen God and remained alive after seeing him?“Hagar saw the Angel of the Lord and she also called the Angel of the Lord 'God'.
This is okay, it is God's representative.
Jesus is also God's representative, perhaps that Angel which Hagar saw was the pre-existant Jesus?
Maybe I am wrong.
But one thing which I do know is that there is only one true God and that is YHVH, you know, the same God which was Jesus' God.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 26 2012,05:57) The same principal applies to John 1:1, but with a twist. The first mention of “God” in part b (the Word was with God) actually uses the definite article “THE”. So the Greek words leave no guess work in part b, because it is spelled out for us that the Word was with THE god. As for part c (and the Word was god), John did NOT use the definite article “THE” in front of “god”. So that leaves it open to the translators. There is a rule called “Colwell's Rule”, which allows for us in English to ADD the definite article “THE” in certain cases. And there is the general rule that we MUST add the indefinite article “a” in many cases – so that it makes sense in English.
So now, as the info from the NETNotes scholars pointed out, we in English have the choice of ADDING the definite article “THE” before the word “god” in part c, or ADDING the indefinite article “a” before the word “god” in part c.
Either way, we in English are ADDING a word. And EITHER translation would be faithful to the Greek words that were written. There is no right answer based only on grammar. (I should mention that the NETNotes scholars aren't breaking new ground with this announcement. ANY Greek to English translator knows these rules, and even the strictest of Trinitarian scholars will admit that “a god” is one of the grammatical possibilities of John 1:1c.)
So now we have to decide BY CONTEXT whether John meant “THE god” (God), or whether he meant “a god”.
Here's what we know:
1. John specifically used the definite article “THE” in part b – saying that the Word was with THE god.2. He did NOT use the definite article in part c…………….. why not? (After all, he used it both times for the Word, calling him “THE logos” both times. So why are there two mentions of “theos”, but only one of them is called “THE theos” by John?)
3. It is an asinine notion that THE God can be with THE God. Even the TRINITARIAN scholars from NETNotes point this out by saying, “The construction in John 1:1c does not equate the Word with the person of God (this is ruled out by 1:1b, “the Word was with God”)”
4. We also know that Jesus WAS called a god many times in scripture, but that he is not the Most High God that he is the Son of. (Mark 5:7, Luke 1:32)
5. We know that the Word later became flesh, dwelled on earth, and died at the hands of human beings. (Did God Almighty do these things – or did He send His Son to do these things?)
6. We know that God created all things THROUGH this Word. (Did God create all things through Himself?)
7. We know that this “Word” in John 1 is most likely “the Word of God” from Rev 19:13. (Does it seem likely that God Almighty would be called “the Word OF God Almighty”?)
I could go on and on, 2B, but I believe this is enough information for now – and that it should be enough information for you to make an informed decision about John 1:1.
To sum up, don't just assume that because the vast majority of English translations say “and the Word was God”, that it's the truth of the matter. (See Judges 13:22 above) I could list MANY English translations (not just the NWT) that DON'T have “God” in 1:1c. Remember that the majority of these “God” translations are made by men who are trying desperately to FORCE the scriptures into teaching that Jesus IS the very God he is the Son of. And in their zeal to do this, they don't even seem to mind that they've come up with a translation that has the Word OF God being the very God he was WITH in the beginning.
If even the 25 TRINITARIAN scholars from NETNotes can clearly see the flaw in this reasoning, then we should be able to easily see it too.peace,
mike
So then, the Trinitarians agree with YOU as do the Binitarians…. they each agree that there are two or three Gods.
Well, that is NOT what I believe, I believe that there is one true God, YHVH.
I do not have all of the fancy words to express myself to others, nor the high up education and grammatical excellence, but i am okay with that.Neither did the Disciples.
And they were not God.
They were not after the praise of man.
They simply followed Jesus, did the will of Him and of God.————-
Studying the Greek will not save you.
Mike, “In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God”.
Say it enough times and it may sink in
One God
One Son
And one Spirit.Not two Gods.
You are having double vision.2besee,
Quote Those who think that they know it all, usually know nothing.
Knowing the Father and knowing the Son is actually knowing their will.It seems to offend people that I say that I am confident, (and bold) about what I know and believe. I will give some scriptures.
Pro_4:7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding
2Ti_2:7 Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things.
Job_32:8 But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding
Job_38:36 Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts? or who hath given understanding to the heart?
Pro_8:5 O ye simple, understand wisdom: and, ye fools, be ye of an understanding heart.
Isa_6:9 And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.
Isa_28:9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts
1Pe_2:2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:If you are not comfortable and confident enough with what you believe, that you cannot make the statement that only God can show you truth when it was God in the first place who has showed you truth then you are not sure of what you believe.
Man can teach or preach the Word, but it is God and His abiding Spirit that teaches and confirms the truth.
2besee…………..I agree with much you have said , Except that Jesus is A God, and i am not sure if you are saying that really, I do believe God who is a Spirit and was truly in Jesus. But i also believe becasue God is in a Person or Angel or demigod , never make that person a true GOD themselves. Jesus would not have said He could do nothing of himself if he were a true God of anykind.
I think we are in agreement but am not completley sure Brother. I also do believe it is the Sprit of God that teaches us what is true though, it is by His spirit of Truth we are able to precieve what is true and what is not true. Jesus said no you not that you shall all be taught by God
peace and love to you and yours……………………………………………………………gene
Quote (2besee @ Nov. 27 2012,14:15) Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 26 2012,15:24) richt Quote To all: I have been through this for years and I am convinced, (by much studying) that this is truth weather you believe in it or not I don't think I can change unless God shows me different through His Word. how you think God will help you if you cluster yourself in a shell and say that it i am done I know for me thats the truth ,
unless God …..what you have shut yourself up ,this means you have become deff and dum to what ever any one will say ,
wakeup free yourself and understand that all the time of mens life his made to know God his creator ,
how many times did i say what you say and then start over to read the scriptures again and learn new thing find more jewels more diamants ,and perles ,I have never say that again and left religion
This is true, I mean for each of us.Those who think that they know it all, usually know nothing.
Knowing the Father and knowing the Son is actually knowing their will.
Mans doctrines will not save them.
right you areQuote (2besee @ Nov. 27 2012,14:11) Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 26 2012,14:57) Quote (2besee @ Nov. 26 2012,04:48) Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 26 2012,11:26) 2b Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth… “The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters.”
can you see that there are two beguinings
Terraricca, do you mean two creations?
2b1)Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth… “
2)”The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters.”
what the 6 days means his that the earth was transformed into a home for men to be a god (master)
the earth was created long before God made the changes on earth ,
I feel that 'in the beginning' has another meaning.
I read in Origen that 'in the beginning' and the two accounts of creation has something to do with the first creation of the spiritual side to man (the inner man) and the second creation was the flesh.Just saying.
2bsI read most of what is available of Origen ,good lecture ,what he says is what Paul sais ” the the invisible was first and so created the visible “
man his part of the visible ,to my understanding their is only 144k that will be redeemed from the earth no more no less REV 7 and 14,
all others we are working our faith for our live everlasting,what God promised,
remember all the workers in the vine yard working from the first hour to the last hour of the day and some worked only one hour yet are all paid the same, one dinar (our live)
Quote (2besee @ Nov. 27 2012,02:38) YES, I accept this fact but,
It is the spirit which teaches us truth – not a theologian!Would you put all of your trust in a theologian, or in God?
Where did you learn your doctrine? From Greek Scholars?
Hi 2B,I learned my doctrine from scripture and from answered prayers for spiritual guidance.
I am happy to hear you accept the fact that, grammatically speaking, John 1:1c can be translated as “God” or “a god”.
Now we only have to decide, based on context of the scriptures as a whole, which meaning John had in mind when he wrote that verse.
You prefer the “God” translation, while I think “a god” makes much more sense on many levels.
More to come………….
Quote (2besee @ Nov. 27 2012,03:02) So then they were calling an Angel 'a god'?
As is in the story of Ishmael, and Hagar…………..Hagar saw the Angel of the Lord and she also called the Angel of the Lord 'God'.
This is okay, it is God's representative.
Jesus is also God's representative, perhaps that Angel which Hagar saw was the pre-existant Jesus?
Maybe I am wrong.
But one thing which I do know is that there is only one true God and that is YHVH, you know, the same God which was Jesus' God.
I agree 100% with what you've posted here, 2B.I even agree that Hagar's angel could have been Jesus, but there is no way to tell – since God has myriads of myriads of angels to choose from. But whether this particular messenger of God was Jesus or not, Jesus is called a god in a few different scriptures. Did you know that?
The point is that God's representatives are sometimes called gods in scripture, whether they be human judges, or spiritual messengers of God. Jesus is no exception to that rule.
I also agree whole-heartedly that our one true God is Jehovah, who is not only OUR one and only God, but also JESUS' one and only God.
Quote (2besee @ Nov. 27 2012,03:13) So then, the Trinitarians agree with YOU as do the Binitarians…. they each agree that there are two or three Gods.
Well, that is NOT what I believe, I believe that there is one true God, YHVH.
I do not have all of the fancy words to express myself to others, nor the high up education and grammatical excellence, but i am okay with that.
It seems to me that Trinitarians believe we have but ONE God, who CONSISTS OF three different persons.Our resident Binarian believes in two completely individual Almighty Gods, who rule together as an “Echad Unity Godhead” – to the best of my understanding.
I believe like you and the scriptures teach: There is one true God, YHWH. Jesus said we are to worship and serve only that One. And that's exactly what I do.
And don't worry, you won't need fancy words or a higher education to discuss scriptures with me. That first big post from me is not the norm – but I had to make sure you knew that, grammatically speaking, both “God” and “a god” are equally acceptable translations of 1:1c.
You have accepted this fact. Now I only await your answer to the question in my last post, ie: Are you aware that Jesus is called a god in scripture?
Quote (2besee @ Nov. 27 2012,03:40) Mike, “In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God”. Say it enough times and it may sink in
One God
One Son
And one Spirit.Not two Gods.
You are having double vision.
Funny.Not two gods, 2B, but “many gods and lords, both in heaven and on earth”. (1 Cor 8:5)
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Nov. 28 2012,03:20) 2besee…………..I agree with much you have said , Except that Jesus is A God, and i am not sure if you are saying that really, I do believe God who is a Spirit and was truly in Jesus. But i also believe becasue God is in a Person or Angel or demigod , never make that person a true GOD themselves. Jesus would not have said He could do nothing of himself if he were a true God of anykind. I think we are in agreement but am not completley sure Brother. I also do believe it is the Sprit of God that teaches us what is true though, it is by His spirit of Truth we are able to precieve what is true and what is not true. Jesus said no you not that you shall all be taught by God
peace and love to you and yours……………………………………………………………gene
Hi Gene,I believe that there is one true God – YHVH – and that there is no other 'God' besides him. Just as the OT says.
When it says that in the beginning was the word, I have come to believe over time, and since making this thread, that the word which was with God, and was God, was God's own word, a part of God, much like our own word is a part of our being and is us, so that is what I believe John 1:1 is meaning. I believe it is a correct translation and i believe that adding the 'A' and changing it to 'a god' is WRONG. It is making it seem that it is speaking about two separate beings or two seperate Gods (the word and God being two separate beings) when I believe that they are not. I believe what it says – that the word was with God and the word was God – the word being God's own word.
To say that there is only one God which is YHVH and to then apply that biblical rule to the verse in John 1:1 is correct I believe.
So there is only one God over all, with his own spirit and his own word and then there is the Son, Jesus Christ.
Quote (2besee @ Nov. 28 2012,18:32) Hi Gene, I believe that there is one true God – YHVH – and that there is no other 'God' besides him. Just as the OT says.
When it says that in the beginning was the word, I have come to believe over time, and since making this thread, that the word which was with God, and was God, was God's own word, a part of God, much like our own word is a part of our being and is us, so that is what I believe John 1:1 is meaning. I believe it is a correct translation and i believe that adding the 'A' and changing it to 'a god' is WRONG. It is making it seem that it is speaking about two separate beings or two seperate Gods (the word and God being two separate beings) when I believe that they are not. I believe what it says – that the word was with God and the word was God – the word being God's own word.
To say that there is only one God which is YHVH and to then apply that biblical rule to the verse in John 1:1 is correct I believe.
So there is only one God over all, with his own spirit and his own word and then there is the Son, Jesus Christ.
Hi l2Besee,Excellent post! …I fully agree.
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
