spin

Well, for fuck sake, I'd never have guessed.

First, it would be handy if you consult the best recognized Greek dictionary available. (See my previous post, which you didn't look at closely enough.)

Maybe I will, but only on the condition that you look at the entry in dictionary I cited, matey.

Most people and their dogs and the fleas on their dogs have theories.

No.


spin

Chris Weimer

Does the word "divine" mean anything to you?

"And in the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and divine was the word."

(sorry spin, I couldn't help)

spin

I'll slap your wrist next time, love. He's gotta earn his Dr Seuss badge.

yummyfur

If that were actually true, we could probably just ignore the writings of Paul, John and Philo. Any author who would use well known words with distinct meanings both in Greek and Greek Jewish tradition(Septuagint), as totally synonymous for each other, is likely doing a lot of the ancient equivalent of crack cocaine in heavy amounts.

Chris Weimer

:rolling: :thumbs:

Sheshbazzar

What is most enlightening and fascinating is any attempt to translate it back into the Hebrew, because each word that must be so carefully chosen, and carries a heavy load of OT Scriptural associations.
The opening phrase "In the beginning...", rather obviously corresponding with the opening phrase of Genesis 1:1, ["Beresheth"....,] continuing, the writer next employs the existence verb "was"..., ["ha-yah"] "the Word" ["ha-dabar"]
Reading from my Hebrew NT translation of John 1:1 gives me the phrase;
"Beresheth ha'yah ha'debar, v'ha'debar ha'yah.."In the beginning WAS the Word, and the Word WAS.... from this point on translation enters a touchy field where any translator has to begin to choose between the ancient names and titles of divinity, thus few Hebrew translations of John 1:1 are likely to read identically.
I have no doubt that it was the authors intent to incorporate these widely known and sacred opening words of the Hebrew Scriptures into a play on words setting forth that "the Word" ["ha-debar"] was that same creating Word that was first employed by Elohim in Genesis 1:3, "let there BE [yeh'he] "and there WAS" ["v'yeh'he]- (following here the Masoretic vowel pointing, however I am persuaded that the proper vocalization was and is "Yah'he", the genesis of the names "Yah" and "Yahweh")
Employing these word and name plays the writer inextricably links the 'word' of creation with the 'Word WAS made flesh', and the creative word that first caused light to come into existence, with the 'WAS the Light of men'. The play on ancient words furthermore was use to link "YAH" the creator with "YAH-ha-shua", "YAH-the-Deliverer" or "AM-the-Deliverer"(the English name "Joshua" now more widely known by a mispronounced Greek name.)

Haran

In the phrase under discussion, θεὸς ἦν � λόγος, God would be a predicate nominative, which also explains why θεὸς is in the nominative rather than the accusative case.

I would say that the definite article is lacking before θεὸς simply to show that it is the predicate nominative while highlighting the subject with the definite article, � λόγος.

Therefore, the phrase would be as many translations have it, "...the word was God."

Sheshbazzar

The corresponding Hebrew phrase would be, "...v'ha-dabar ha'yah Elohim."
= "and the word WAS Elohim."
The reason I say this, is that the most devout among the Jews were very protective of their "Holy Language", and considered learning or speaking in Greek to be worse than eating swines flesh. (not at all strange considering the atrocities they had so recently suffered under the Greeks, as recorded in the Books of Maccabees.)
Thus the most devout of the Jewish nation could have cared less if some messianic pretender was claimed to be a "Theos" or even "The Theos" as the term "Theos" to them would have only been used as the identifying title of that foreign (and therefor false) diety worshiped by Greeks, and by those apostate, compromising, and syncristic Jews who were willing to subvert the true faith to please controlling political powers.
But to claim that this "messiah" was, "...ha'Yah Elohim"... "WAS Elohim"
The "self-existent Elohim" of the Hebrew Scriptures and religion, would be an open confrontation with the strongest beliefs and taboos of devout Hebrew speaking people, And it was these in particular that John 1:1 was addressed to, and who were so incensed with the claim and the perceived trespass against their religion.

Haran

Of course the NT was written in Greek, not Hebrew. It is possible that Jesus and his disciples spoke Aramaic. What you have stated remains in the realm of speculation because there is no physical evidence of such a phrase. Further, why would it have been Elohim instead of the more reverent Adonai?

Chili

But they are a good beginning until on gets a 'hold of one's self" and realize that 'like god' becomes "God" in the transformation from theory to fact. For this only correct opinion is required that takes us from what God said to what God is.