Thomas II

Translation:

The Beginning was a vibratory utterance (expression) of God, imbued with the essence (consciousness) of God to such a degree, that we could say "It was God"...

yummyfur

Since everyone is giving possible readings how about this one

In the beginning was the divine plan(that which coordinates the universe ala Heraclitus), the divine plan was before/above God, the divine plan was(for) God('s existance).

In the sense that first there was a divine plan, but the divine plan was for God's existance. Much like many of the possibilities, the meaning seems to me largley a semantics game anyways.

Pilate

Originally Posted by Enda80
I am told that correctly translated, this phrase should be the word was "a god" not "God" , this phrase from the early chapter of the Gospel of John. Any feedback on this?

Here is some help:
To begin with, words have meanings relative to time and place. As time goes on, the meanings of words change. For example, one hundred years ago in San Francisco, the word “gay� meant “cheerful� or “jovial.� Today, in San Francisco, the primary meaning of the word “gay� is “homosexual.�
To get an understanding of whatthe word "god" meant when it was written in the Gospel of John you may want to read the article "What did the Word 'god' Mean in Jesus’ Time?" at http://www.prudentialpublishing.info...ecame_gods.htm
Briefly, Angels were spirits and in those days spirits were called “gods.� While Jesus was alive, no one called him “a god.� After his death Jesus became a spirit (Paul wrote Jesus rose "in the pririt"). For this reason, after his death, some New Testament writers called him “a god.� Those writers believed that Jesus before his death was a spirit and that after his earthly life (as a human being), he took his earlier form: the form of a spirit.
(Such as Paul -see article "Did Paul Believe that Jesus Is God?" at http://www.prudentialpublishing.info...of%20jesus.htm
and the writer of the Gospel of John- see article "Did John believe Jesus is God?" at http://www.prudentialpublishing.info...w_of_jesus.htm)
Initially, the Hellenist and Gentile Christians called Jesus “a god� because he was a spirit, an angel. But after a few decades, the image of Jesus' evolved and this title shed its original meaning.
I hope this helps
Pilate

yummyfur

I don't think you or the author of that website know anything about etymology or linguistics or Greek.

Umm, you do realize our word angel comes from the Greek word angelos, which even before the Gospels were written, was used for such spirits. In fact the Septuagint, the OT written in Greek, used the word angelos for the Hebrew word for such entities, mal'ak. In fact even the NT uses this word, and does not call such entities theos, if Jesus was percieved by NT writers as only an angel they would have used the very well known Greek word angelos. Also there is the well know and used Greek word Pneuma for spirits as well, no need to be writing theos.

Pilate

Thanks kindly for your compliment, but you may be surprised at what I know.
Anyway, here is how I want to be treated, and how I will treat you and all others.
First, forgive my typo errors and I will forgive yours.
Next, if you or anyone else thinks that something I wrote is incorrect first ask me: "How do you know this is right?" "What evidence do you have to back what you wrote?" Be specific.
If my response is insufficient, post the evidence (not your opinions) that shows that I am wrong.
And then: I will be thankful and grateful to you for teaching me! Afterall, I want to learn from all of you.
Now going to your point: You implied that the meaning of the word "god" in the passage of John is not "angel."
My answer:
I suggest you read more carefully those web-sites I recommended. They contain useful information, including the one below.
Here is a footnote from the web-site which deals with the meaning of the word "god."
In the following example the word “angel� means “spirit�: “When he knocked at the outer gate, a maid named Rho'da came to answer. On recognizing Peter's voice, she was so overjoyed that, instead of opening the gate, she ran in and announced that Peter was standing at the gate. They said to her, "You are out of your mind!" But she insisted that it was so. They said, "It is his angel {i.e. Peter's spirit}.’ � (Acts 12:13-15 NRSV) Those who said ‘It is his spirit,� believed that Peter had died. Also, “Are not all angels spirits ...?� (Hebrews 1:14 NRSV)
.........
There is more where this came from. Ask and you shall receive.
I hope this helped in understanding the passage of John.

yummyfur

Firstly, if I think something you wrote is incorrect, I will tell you why it is, which I did, why do I need to ask you for information I already know?

There is no obligation here, to wait for your evidence, before posting contrary evidence.

Yes I did read that footnote, which is on the meaning of the word angel not the meaning of the word god, but it does not help the article out at all, which is probably why it was put in a footnote. It actually shows that angels were called angelos, and not theos(god) what a suprise. Therefore the earlier claim by the author that "Angels were spirits and in those days spirits were called “gods.”" is not true. The footnote he gives, is hardly a good enough explanation of the usage for the word angelos, as he fails to point out this is how the Septuagint(Greek OT), available for probably at least 150 years before the Gospels, refered to such entities, and anyone coming out of this tradition would not use a term like theos if they meant angel. So when John uses the word theos, he means God, not angel, or he would use the word angelos.

Again above you state
" Now going to your point: You implied that the meaning of the word "god" in the passage of John is not "angel.""

The word John uses is theos, and he is perfectly aware of the word and usage of the Greek word angelos, but does not use it, we can be assured that he meant god and not angel. What more is there really to say.

Pilate

Peter,
I wrote explanatory notes between the following six verses you gave as examples where in the Greek text the article does not precede the word 'god.'
You wrote:
In six of these cases we see the word without an article, which are:

John 1:1. Ἐν á¼€Ï?χῇ ἦν á½? λόγος, καὶ á½? λόγος ἦν Ï€Ï?ὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν á½? λόγος.
This case is part of the current discussion. In the first instance "God" is a name (in the nominative case) and is preceded by the article 'o', in the second instance 'god' is a noun (also in the nominative case) and for this reason does not need an article. (The discussion we have is: is it a noun or a name?)

Galatians 6:7. Μὴ πλανᾶσθε, θεὸς οá½? μυκτηÏ?ίζεται· ὃ γὰÏ? á¼?ὰν σπείÏ?ῃ ἄνθÏ?ωπος, τοῦτο καὶ θεÏ?ίσει·
This case is not clear whether it refers to God or any god. Paul was writing to a culture (the Hellenistic culture) that believed in many gods. And he used common Greek exrpessions to reach out to the Greeks. I would venture to say that this expression (θεoÏ‚ οu μυκτηÏ?iζεται) may have been a current Greek expression. Can you do a search in non biblical Greek writings of the Hellenistc era to see if this expression was used by anyone else?
By the way, Kirby, what software and database you use to search Greek texts? I would appreciate the lead. I would like to have all the ancient Greek biblical and non biblical writings, in Greek, on one CD, and be able to search them. Does anyone know where I can find it?

2 Thessalonians 2:4. á½? ἀντικείμενος καὶ ὑπεÏ?αιÏ?όμενος á¼?πὶ πάντα λεγόμενον θεὸν á¼¢ σέβασμα, ὥστε αá½?τὸν εἰ$Ï‚ τὸν ναὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καθίσαι, ἀποδεικνύντα ἑαυτὸν ὅτι ἔστιν θεός.
This one does not need the article. The NASB translates it correctly as a noun: "... who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship"


1 Timothy 2:5. εἷς γὰÏ? θεός, εἷς καὶ μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθÏ?ώπων, ἄνθÏ?ωπος ΧÏ?ιστὸς Ἰησοῦς,
This case in the first instance "εiÏ‚ γaÏ? θεoÏ‚ {eστιν}" (the verb 'is' is missing in the Greek text) the word 'god' is a noun. In the second instance it is a name and is NOT preceded by the article: "For there is one god, and one mediator also between God and men, {the} man Christ Jesus," Also the word "man" is not preceded by the article (I included it within curly brackets {}). In the second case 'God' is in the genitive case 'θεοu.' Paul used in the genitive case the name "God" (of God) and did not include the article "tou" ("τοu θεοu"). (Keep in mind, Paul did not master the Koine language.) Here is an additional example in 1 Corinthians 7:7 "exei xarisma ek θεοu."
Here is another case: in Ephesians 2:8 "θεοu to δωÏ?oν." Another case of God without the article is 1 Peter 4:10 "xaÏ?ιτος θεοu." Peter, do a search in the Genitive case and you may find more examples. I had to find the last three by scratching my head. Paul often omits the article in the Genitive case even when he refers to Christ (and Christ is a name.)

Hebrews 11:16. διὸ οá½?κ á¼?παισχύνεται αá½?τοὺς á½? θεὸς θεὸς á¼?πικαλεῖσθαι αá½?τῶν, ἡτοίμασεν γὰÏ? αá½?τοῖς πόλιν.
This one does not need the article. "Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their god." The possesive "their" qualifies the word 'god' as a noum. (example: my god, your god, their god, etc,)

James 2:19. σὺ πιστεύεις ὅτι εἷς θεός �στιν;
This does not need the article: "you believe that there is one god." The word 'god' is a noun not a name. God is a name.
you wrote:
The predominance of references to � θεὸς and the content of the references without the article should give us a clue as to the interpretation of John 1:1.

kind thoughts,
Peter Kirby[/QUOTE]

Peter,
I agree that the predominance of references to "o θεoς" {the nominative case only} and the content of the references should give us a clue as to the interpretation of John 1:1. In the case of John 1:1 "θεoς" is in the nominative case. Now besides, the context of the verse one has to consider the context of the whole book (each author of the New Testament has his own specific view of Jesus. One has also to consider by whom the particular author has been influenced. And this requires detective work outside the Bible. One also has to consider the insertions and alterations after the author wrote the original manuscript.
I hope this helps a little.
Pilate

spin

Actually, it could also be an adjective, see Liddell and Scott, at the end -- which is what I understand it to be.


spin

Peter Kirby

I use the Thesaurus Lingua Graecae. It cost $300 but is, I think, one of the best purchases I've ever made. See here:

http://www.tlg.uci.edu/

kind thoughts,
Peter Kirby

Pilate

Spin,
an adjective is a word or phrase naming an attribute, added to or grammatically related to a noun to modify it or describe it, such as the word "green' "a green god" the word 'green is an adjective that describes the noun god. Explain to me how the word 'god' functions as an adjective in John 1:1.
I recomment to you and to all those who are reading this to check out an article on the web on Philo Judaeus
http://www.jesushistory.info/philo_o...oundations.htm
Scroll down and you will find How Philo influenced the theology and the writings of John and Paul. This will explain where John got his "unique idea" about "Logos." (There is also a history of Logos, which goes way before Philo, but Philo was the channel of influence for John.} A study of Philo is indispensable in understanding the Origins of Christianity.
There is a lot more to this to get the complete picture.
It is important to understand that the words "god," "logos," "angel" and "spirit" are synonymous in the writings of Philo as well as in the writings of John and Paul. I can furnish examples upon request.
I hope this helps