Bentley Layton on John 1:1cIn his new grammar book, Coptic in 20 Lessons (Peeters Leuven, 2007) Bentley Layton has a valuable comment on Coptic John 1:1c, which says auw ne.u.noute pe p.Saje. He shows it can be diagrammed in this manner:auw = andne = past tense marker, “was”u.noute = a godpe = isp.Saje = the WordThus, literally, the Coptic…[Read more]

“The Sahidic is probably the earliest of the translations,and also has the greatest textual value. It came into existence nolater than the third century, since a copy of 1 Peter exists in amanuscript from about the end of that century.”http://www.glasspath.com/~waltzmn/Versions.html20th century Coptic scholar and New Testament translator George…[Read more]

http://jehovah.to/exe/translation/coptic.pdf

Sahidic is closer to English than is Greek. (it has both “a” and “the”)Therefore, it sheds light on how John 1:1 was understood when Koine Greek was still a spoken language.Taken from another site:The whole deal with John 1:1c is: what does the lack of an article imply? Is it still definite in meaning? Well, that's how most modern translations…[Read more]

Pulvarthy, there are several Bible's that at John 1:1 that read “the Word was a god” or “the word was divine.”But most Bibles of course read “the Word was God.”The problem in translating the greek is that Greek doesn't have an indefinite article . It does have a definite article .So how do we know how the earliest Christians understood this?Since…[Read more]

Quote Just because Lot couldn't read the fine print (the law) doesn't mean he wasn't accountable. I'm just saying that the law, leviticus etc, came later, after Lot's time.

Quote I don't see you successfully refuting any of the disproofs put up against Noah's flood for example. Maybe I wasn't paying attention, but I wasn't aware any “disproofs” existed. I was aware that there were some things that as of yet, we simply can't answer, just as there are some things that today, science simply can't answer. Does this…[Read more]

“Let US make man in our image.”

Quote So I see that there are 3 possibilities, as you do, (even if our opinions may differ):1) divine (quality2) a god (identify)3) The God (identity)Yes, those are the possibilities. Isn't it interesting that the early Coptic translation (which unlike other languages back then, actually having an indefinite article) translated it as “a god.”Of…[Read more]

Quote And you accuse me of being deluded?!It wasn't an accusation so much as a statement of fact.Contradictions are different than not knowing the answer. There have been numerous times where we don't know the answer to something, only to learn the answer upon further research or further time.Yet, you seem to think not having the answer at this…[Read more]

Quote The “Too Hard Basket” has shown that 5 biblical claims are not true. stu, you are truly deluded.

If we could narrow down the time of this translation, it would be helpful.

Quote 8And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?9Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,10Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,11Cretes and Arabians, we do hear…[Read more]

I'm not sure I understand your first sentence. The grammar is weird or something.

Quote Hi david,So what you have not seen or experienced has been done away with?Nick, it has not been done away with because I have not seen it. It was done away with, as the Bible said it would be, because it fulfilled its stated purpose.The babbling that goes on today, I have seen. It does not compare to the miraculous speaking in “different…[Read more]

Quote Moses gave the written law on tablets but there was an oral law given in Leviticus that spoke to incest.David, if I had to give a prize to the best debater here – it would be you! That's a compliment, by the way.Well thankyou mandy. I don't really consider myself a debater, just someone who recognizes truth. Speaking of which—Moses, the…[Read more]

Was the Word “God” or “a god”?”That question has to be considered when Bible translators handle the first verse of the Gospel of John. In the New World Translation, the verse is rendered: “In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” (John 1:1) Some other translations render the last part of the verse to co…[Read more]

No one seems to know this or care, but the way the coptic translators translated John 1:1 about 1700 years ago may just be the most important clue to helping us to understand how it should be translated.Translating “the Word was a god,” 1700 Years Ago“At least by the third century C.E., the first translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures had b…[Read more]

https://www.heavennet.net/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=1;t=1342;st=1250Thanks T8.  I was thinking of making a thread on this myself.  The link above is where we started discussing it in the other thread (just for my own record.)FOR A SIMPLE INTRODUCTION TO THIS, START HERE:http://copticjohn.blogspot.com/What is certain, and some might f…[Read more]

Quote Hi brother David there is no necessity to add “a” before God. The word of God always is the same it never changes. God sends His word to fulfill His will. It is not another person apart from that One God. God is always remain One and Only as per Jn 5:44. There can not be another God besides that One God who created this universe apart from…[Read more]