In other words, if theos en ho logos is “a god,” how could John have said “the Word was God?” We have already seen that if John had employed the article before theos, he would have made the terms theos and logos interchangeable, amounting to Sabellianism. I am aware that this is a serious charge, however, the facts reveal that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society has consistently refused to name any of its NWT translators, and of those who have been discovered, none had any more than two years of Greek and no formal Hebrew.19. NKJV In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Hardly seems coincidental, does it? By the simple omission of the article (“the”, or in Greek, ho) before the word for God in the last phrase, John avoids teaching Sabellianism, while by placing the word where it is in the clause, he defeats another heresy, Arianism, which denies the true Deity of the Lord Jesus. It is a grand introduction to the Son of God and the Savior of the world. John 1:14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. “Pros with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other.”2. The Logos became flesh (John 1:14), and not the Father. 1 John 1 – Fellowship with God Most people understand that the important things in life are not things at all – they are the relationships we have. The content, style, and vocabulary seem to warrant the conclusion that these three epistles were addressed to the same readers as the Gospel of John. Jesus said in John 15:6, “If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned.” And in John 8:31, he said, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples”So when John says, “These are written so th… Almost all the controversy surrounding John 1:1 revolves around the fact that the theos of the last phrase kai theos en ho logos is anarthrous, i.e., it has no article. Certainly one can hardly conceive of a higher Being. John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”. This phrase must be taken with the one that follows. Until 1950, an extra section dealing with a translation of John 1:1 as “the Word was a god” would not have been necessary. Jesus of Nazareth, the carpenter, the teacher, is Very God.8. About ESV In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He uses the term three times of Jesus in the Gospel, here, in John 1:18, and in John 20:28. He possesses the same essence as God the Father, is one with Him in nature and attributes. As it is, John asserts that in the Pre-incarnate state the Logos was God, though the Father was greater than the Son (John 14:28). If God were articular and Logos non-articular, the affirmation would be that God was Logos, but not that the Logos was God. It is good to note Vincent’s comment that here “John is not trying to show who is God, but who is the Word.”10 The Logos is the central character here. Contact. also hoi theristai angeloi eisin (Mt.13:39), ho logos ho sos alatheia estin (John 17:17), ho nomos hamartia; (Ro. A footnote appears after the comment on the article, and it says: Those people who emphasize that the true rendering of the last clause of John 1.1 is “the word was a god”, prove nothing thereby save their ignorance of Greek grammar. (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal … This translation violates the following principles: 1) Monotheism in the Bible – certainly it can not be argued that John would use the very word he always uses of the one true God, theos, of one who is simply a “god-like” one or a lesser “god.” The Scriptures do not teach that there is a whole host of intermediate beings that can be called “gods.” That is gnosticism. The preposition John uses here is quite revealing. Some scholars see the anarthrous theos as emphasizing the nature of the Word, and all agree that it is not simply an adjectival type of description, saying that Christ is merely a “god-like one.” A more recent authors work (March 1973) bears on this issue as well. 1-john 4:19 We love him, because he first loved us. He does so by consistently using en of the Logos, the Word, and by consistently employing a totally different verb in reference to all other things. These verses summarize Jesus’ ministry and mission on Earth. NLT In the beginning the Word already existed. Instead, he used theos, the very word John will use consistently for the Father, the “only true God” (John 17:3). 1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched —this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. Newsletter As icing on the cake, John then precludes anyone from misunderstanding his claim that Jesus is eternally God by writing verse 3. He was in the beginning with God. First it should be noted that Robertson and Nicoll had passed away before the work of Colwell, and their comments reflect this. The correct translation of this passage is here given, and anyone interested in the technical aspects of the argument are referred to Section II.