Discussion between Revelation Lad and George F

Feeds

05:24

1

A: John 1:1c Out of context, how would a native reader of Koine Greek understand the text?

As an Alexandrian familiar with Greek Koine grammar after the Jesus age Let's say I was a speaker of the koine Greek tongue (i.e. I knew syntax and grammar), and I was living in Alexandria of Egypt, and I saw this passage, regardless of whether I was religious or atheist, and I was seeing it for ...

George F

@Austin I'm not sure from what point of view you want me to answer you. I put it in this way with regard to the Egyptian in Alexandria, because I think it would not be easy for the reader to understand the meaning for himself except by the syntax.

@Austin The translation, in any case, is as follows: In the beginning (when God began to create the world) the Word existed, and (that) Word was in God (or with God), and the Word existed as God.

@Austin Always referring to the Scriptures of the prophets or the saints in general, the word "god" refers to God. I just put it that way in the 1st example for various reasons. By "as God" I mean that he was "God". The Greek language in general, many times, for clarification purposes, does not use a definite article, or indefinite article. If you put "the God", there was a risk of misunderstanding. Perhaps the one and the same God. But here John is clarifying that he is also God, another one besides᾿ the Father, but as the 2nd person of the same, not different.

@Austin Yes, I understand. In English it could be said as: "a god" or "a God" or "God". John did not put an article, either indefinite or definite, to show, I think, the same essence of the Son as of the Father. That is, that He was one with the Father, and not another God as in koine Greek "a God" would be, nor again that He was only God, so that he should write "the God". But he put it without the article "God".

@Austin If someone didn't know from Scripture and tradition, no, no Greek would compare this verse to God at all.

@Austin In general, from what I understood, your question is, would someone knowledgeable in Greek understand the verse, without being theologically catechized?

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

@Perry Webb "god" in Greek is a noun. Names are not compounded with the article in Greek, while nouns are. It's just that in Greek today we capitalize the letter to indicate who we are referring to.

Revelation Lad

Really? Someone would understandnd "a god" despite lacking the indefinite article and capitalization?

George F

@Revelation Lad You have not understood the question well

Revelation Lad

I understand "a god" is anachronistic reasoning. Just because you remove literary context doesn't mean you can ignore historical context. Linguistically both God and god are theos. You cannot posit why John did not use the indefinite article because it did not exist at that time in history. The best you can say is "the word was god." Moreover both nouns are nominative so lacking literary context the article is how to identify the subject, not to identify the word: WORD WAS GOD. "The" word is possible only if one posits prior use, which the question says not to do.

Also your comment to Perry about the article and name is not correct. Names are often prefaced with the article. Example John 1:26 ὁ Ἰωάννης for "John."

George F

@Revelation Lad When a name is used in the text in the nominative case, there is no reason to use the definite article, because it is self-defining. And if it is, there will be a reason. It is more common to use the article in other grammar cases when it is needed, and especially in foreign names.

@Revelation Lad As for the issue you analyzed, I don't quite understand you. The phrase: "θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος", if you separate it from the text and an ignorant person of today reads it, he will not understand; while for the old time, the last paragraph I discussed in the answer applies.

@Relevation Lad In English you can't write "the word was god", but "the ward was a god". If you want to define God, then you write "the word was God", but because it's still not understandable, you write: "the Word was God".

Revelation Lad

05:24

I belive the question is about how the phrase would be understood by a first century reader, not a contemporary English speaking person.

George F

@Revelation Lad As for that, there are various understandings, which, I think, have nothing to do with the question. Such as how Heraclitus, or the Stoics, or Philo would have viewed it.

@Revelation Lad The question is this: how would the syntax be constructed in English in translation, without any religious conceptualization.

Revelation Lad

@GeorgeF The question is about how it would be understood in Koine Greek, not English. I realize we need to answer in English, but the question is how the phrase would be understood in Koine. Which ceased before 600 AD. Which was also before capitalization.

So to begin θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος is GOD WAS THE WORD. You can't invoke capitalization. Both nouns are in the nominative case. The only things to indicate a subject (assuming no other context) would be the article θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (subject). So THE WORD WAS GOD. The meaning could even be WORD WAS GOD, since many times English drops the article.

If there was an article with God, ὁ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος the phrase means THE GOD WAS THE WORD and THE WORD WAS THE GOD. As it is written, THE WORD WAS GOD or WORD WAS GOD is the meaning in English. In a polytheistic culture, the question would be GOD of what? Or what type of GOD?

Also Philo of Alexandria wrote about the Logos in a way which came across as God. Those who deny the Trinity will often say John developed his understanding of the Logos from Philo's writings.

George F