Interpret John 1:1 by John 1:1.
To crazy guy.
What is the point?
The "word" is Logos and that goes back to Egypt and the god Ptah or Thoth
To bungi bill
It does not take 50 pages to understand that when the noun lacks the definite article it is up to the translator to translate definite or indefinite depending on the context. Again, i find it rather strange that the only location where Theos lacks the definite article [minus the context fifteen times translating theos as either god, a god, gods, and godly] the only one in question is John 1:1C
Should Jn 1:6 read 'And there was a man sent from a God?'
Jn 1:12 but as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of 'a god'.
Jn 1:13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man but of 'a god'.
Why is there no consistency in the NTW?
when the noun lacks the definite article it is up to the translator to translate definite or indefinite depending on the context.
And accurately performing that "translation" requires more than just a superficial understanding of Koine Greek grammar and its nuances. Definitely not for the amatuer to attempt! (or some college dropout such as FW Franz).
Create the chiasm for John 1:1-18 and you will then see what the passage is really all about.
The Hebrew writings are full of chiasms. The name comes from the Greek letter CHI (like a long X), which is formed when each related element is joined with a straight line.
If you need guidance, then Google.
After you have formed the chiasm to discover the focus of John 1:1-18, then research the experiences of the Johannine Community that created that Prologue. This passage was created late in their experience, when they had moved well into their High Christology.
Google for Johannine Community. Here is a starter:
To Doug Manson
Care to diagram the chiasm? Or should I google that?
To Doug Manson
The prologue can also be considered the thesis. John basically outlines his book in the first eighteen verses. John prologue also addresses the problems that were being experienced by the churches in his bishopric. Gnosticism, Hellenistic thinking, and Judaism.
Note the opening to 1 John, John is addressing both Gnostic beliefs as it concerns the being of Christ.
I can provide the chiasm, but I would first like people to investigate for themselves because activity is the best way to learn and for things to stick. So let's just wait a while and see what people discover is the focus of the chiasm and hence its purpose. At the same time, it provides an understanding of what the Johannine Community intended with that opening as well as providing a mechanism for understanding the message of the remainder of their Gospel.
The Prologue was written well after that community had developed their High Christology, much later than other parts of the Gospel. The aporia are used by scholars (and I am most certainly not one!) to distinguish the individual elements of the Gospel and their likely location in the evolution of its writing.
In my understanding, the Johannine Community was directly addressing its own community members and referencing their experiences at the hand of the synagogue community. As for 1 John, rather than seeing it as addressing Gnosticism, I understand that it was addressing those who had been members of the Johannine Community but had formed their own breakaway schism.
I agree that these Johannine writings concern that Community's views on Christ (and hence on their soteriology). The writers (and I include Paul in this regard) were not writing theology. They were addressing their immediate and local concerns.