Mr. Aardvark

The standard translation is "...and the Word was God." But I've read it should be translated "and the Word was a god."

Thoughts?

Mr. Aardvark

sorry, I put this in the wrong forum

:banghead:

Agnostic Theist

Where did you resd it? It would certainly make sense in light of such statements as 'they have become as gods, like us'. That statement is paraphrased, but it does infer either a multitude of gods or a set of god-like beings (quasi-deities, or deities beneath a higher power, a la Gnosticism) of which God (judeo-christian) was a member.

Mr. Aardvark

I read it many years ago and I can't recall the source now. However, I once was able to read Greek of the NT--work w/ it at least--and I recall translating it that way and stating in class that I thought "was God" was wrong. My very ardent Christian prof just sternly asserted that I was wrong but provided no translation.

I also recall discovering that when Jesus says, "I and my father are one" (John 10:30?) that the word "one" in Greek was the same as word "one" that Jesus uses when he prays asking God to make his disciples "one as we are one"--something like that. It's his so-called "high priestly prayer."

Agnostic Theist

I'll try to find some info. If you still see your Prof, ask him about the christian demiurge. I'm sure he'll have a few things to say about it

graymouser

For as little Greek as I know, I actually know this one by heart:

en arkh hn o logos kai o logos hn pros ton qeon kai qeos hn o logos
εν αÏ?χη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην Ï€Ï?ος τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος

Anyway, the verse runs:

"Of old was the word, and the word was with the god, and god was the word." Arians and Jehovah's Witnesses (who are pretty much Arians) will argue that the final phrase "qeos en o logos" lacks an article "o" and therefore the Word is not God but merely a god. Orthodox Christians will argue (conservative scholars call it the "Granville Sharp Rule") that this "o" should not be expected given the sentence structure. That's my knowledge of the verse.

-Wayne

dlj

I have read that the part of the passage that gets translated as "and the Word was God" should be translated as "and what God was, the Word was." I read it in a book entitled "Honest to God" by John T. A. Robinson. I lent it out to a friend so I don't have it handy to look up where he got that from, but he was suggesting that it made the Word and God of the same essense, or substance, rather than being one person/thing/whatever.

Chris Weimer

Without the article in front of qeov, its definitely attic-reminiscient of syntax-swtich, that is, "and the word was divine." But if the article were there, it would read plain and clear "And god was the word."

Chris Weimer

NB - has anyone thought of looking up what the Coptic reading has? IIRC, their use of the article is similar to Greek, i.e. a certain article would emphasize "the" but lacking one would be a general description, the difference between "a son" and "The Son."

Agnostic Theist

I can't find anything Coptic except some pages that take me to www.biblegateway.com and a load of stuff on Coptic history and 'Bible study' classes :devil1:

Anyway, here's a wealth of information. I may have missed something in it, so maybe one of you lot can find something I didn't

http://www.st-peter-st-paul-coptic-o...rg/Genesis.htm

One interesting point is the belief that God did not 'create' the world, as such, but fashioned it, ie gave form to chaos as it were.