John 1:1

[Dan_Parker]

First of all, you make no effort to convince that coming should be applied to phos rather than to anthropon; Jerome applies it to anthropon rather than to phos, and I believe rightly so. Secondly, you examples of “into the world” fail to address the grammatical question. No one questions that at some point Jesus came into the world in the flesh. I assert only that He was always in the world (certainly in virtute)**that was made through Him, and Justin is consistent in this. He was, in fact, the rock from which the Israelites in the desert drank prior to His coming in the flesh, and that is not open to question.

I thought that the NAB and NJB rendering would be enough to convince a Catholic. While the DR rendering is possible it violates the normative usage of this term with respect to Jesus who is the light that came into the world.

In addition, the word order of the Greek follows the staircase parallelism and so fronts the reference to FWS (light) at the end of verse 8 with FWS at the beginning of verse 9.

The staircase continues with world at the end of verse 10 and the beginning of verse 11.

Older versions were slavish to the word order of the Greek and therefore broke this structure. If the structure were maintained after this verse, the way the DR reads one would expect that verse 10 would start with ANQRWPOS as the subject.

I don’t expect you to find this convincing, particularly if you are not familiar with the Greek.

That is why modern bibles like the NJB and NAB don’t render it this way.

 

[Dan_Parker]

I do not concede that the Word was not always in the the world. That the Word was not always in the flesh is certain, but He was in the world through His sustaining power - “witrhout Him was made nothing that has been made.” “Behold! I make all things new.”(Rev. 21:5)

If the LOGOS was always in the world then he is only as old as the World. I don’t think that buys you very much… certainly not eternity

If you say that he **was (HN) **always in the world, certainly it cannot be before the world was created. By the same token, since he was HN the beginning it was not before the beginning as you insist.

The earliest he could have been in the world was when the world was created and the earliest he could have been in the beginning is the beginning of what is being discussed. That fits JW theology just fine.

That being said, the staircase parallelism and the modern bible translations, including Catholic translations, say that the Word was in the World as in entering the world at his incarnation.

 

[Danno2281]

If the LOGOS was always in the world then he is only as old as the World. I don’t think that buys you very much… certainly not eternity

If you say that he **was (HN) **always in the world, certainly it cannot be before the world was created. By the same token, since he was HN the beginning it was not before the beginning as you insist.

The earliest he could have been in the world was when the world was created and the earliest he could have been in the beginning is the beginning of what is being discussed. That fits JW theology just fine.

That being said, the staircase parallelism and the modern bible translations, including Catholic translations, say that the Word was in the World as in entering the world at his incarnation.

Curiously illogical. Because He was always in the world does not logically necessitate that He was not antecedent to the world any more than a gem’s being in a ring prevents the gem from having existed prior to the creation of the ring. Your cited Goodspeed says: “It was by him that life came into existence, and that life was the light of mankind. That light is still shining in the darkness…,.”
1Cor.10,4 makes it abundantly clear that he was in the world prior to His incarnation.

 

[Dan_Parker]

Curiously illogical. Because He was always in the world does not logically necessitate that He was not antecedent to the world any more than a gem’s being in a ring prevents the gem from having existed prior to the creation of the ring. Your cited Goodspeed says: “It was by him that life came into existence, and that life was the light of mankind. That light is still shining in the darkness…,.”
1Cor.10,4 makes it abundantly clear that he was in the world prior to His incarnation.

Actually my comment was a play on words and a joke. I asked if Jesus was always in the world and you indicated he was. However the text does not say he was always in the world

My point is that the imperfect of EINAI does not indicate an existence prior to a point in the context. The NJB and NAB and other modern bibles understand what is happening in John 1:1-10. If that does not convince you then here is another example:

NAB John 1:15 John testified to him and cried out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘The one who is coming after me ranks ahead of me because he existed = HN before me.’”

On the earth John the baptizer existed before Jesus. The word is HN just like in John 1:1 and 1:10.

Note also the word “coming” in verse 15. This is the same word as in 1:8
NAB John 1:9 The true light, which enlightens everyone, was **coming **into the world.

This is also a technical term John uses for Jesus. In fact frequently in the gospels it is preceded by the definite article as in hO ERXOMENOS (the Coming One).

Back to John 1:15, you can see that HN is bounded by the context. Otherwise if you insist on the eternal HN John the baptizer is older than Jesus in the absolute sense and he also always existed.

 

[humble_maid]

Dan:
I reply as did Peter. Jesus is the Messiah of God, the Son of Man and the Son of the living God.

NAB Luke 9:20 Then he said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Peter said in reply, “The Messiah of God.” 21 He rebuked them and directed them not to tell this to anyone. 22 He said, “The Son of Man must suffer greatly and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed and on the third day be raised.”

NAB Matthew 16:15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. 20 Then he strictly ordered his disciples to tell no one that he was the Messiah.

Thank you for your response. Can you please now tell me what is the Messiah? What does it mean to be the Son of the Living God?

 

[Dan_Parker]

Thank you for your response. Can you please now tell me what is the Messiah? What does it mean to be the Son of the Living God?

Messiah
The word Messiah means anointed and is rendered Christ. Note that it is the Christ or anointed of the Lord, that is God.

NAB Revelation 11:15 Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet. There were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdom of the world now belongs to our Lord and to his Anointed, and he will reign forever and ever.”

NJB Revelation 11:15 Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and voices could be heard shouting in heaven, calling, ‘The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and his Christ, and he will reign for ever and ever.’

Living God
The adjective living when applied to God emphasizes he gave life to all things.
NAB Acts 14:15 "Men, why are you doing this? We are of the same nature as you, human beings. We proclaim to you good news that you should turn from these idols to** the living God, ‘who made heaven and earth and sea and all that is in them**.’

It is also a contrast between lifeless idols and the one true and living God.
NJB 2 Corinthians 6:16 The temple of God cannot compromise with false gods, and that is what we are – the temple of the living God. We have God’s word for it: I shall fix my home among them and live among them; I will be their God and they will be my people.

Yahweh is living God and the true God.
NJB Jeremiah 10:10 But Yahweh is the true God. He is the living God, the everlasting King. The earth quakes when he is wrathful, the nations cannot endure his fury.

Messiah, the Son of the living God

While others were called anointed (cp Lu 4:3) in Scripture, they prefigured the superior and unique office of the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Son of God
While others are called sons of God including spirit creatures (Job 2:1-2) and humans such as Adam (Lu 3:38) who was created by God, the title Son of God takes on heightened meaning when applied to Jesus and also refers to his pre-existence as the Word (John 1:1,14).

In addition he claims to be not just the Son of God but that his relationship to his Father as the Son of God is not shared with other sons of God but that it is his **own **Father (see **IDIOS **in John 5:18, 43), a relationship that belongs to him as an individual.

Therefore he could claim: NAB John 14:6 "I am the way and the truth and the life.** No one comes to the Father except through me**. (Jn 14:6, NAB)

The living God is the Living Father who gave life to his Son
It was mentioned that the living God was the one who gave life to everyone. Jesus said that this also applied to him as well. He said he has life **because **of the Father and that life in himself was something he had because the Father gave it to him, not because he had it because of his nature.

NAB John 6:57 Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.

NAB John 5:26 For just as the Father has life in himself, so also he gave to his Son the possession of life in himself.

Therefore, the title Messiah, the Son of the living God is one which honors both the living Father and the exalted office he have bestowed upon his Son.

 

[twb1621]

Messiah
The word Messiah means anointed and is rendered Christ. Note that it is the Christ or anointed of the Lord, that is God.

So how can you justify seperating the Jesus as God…

the scripture I present that shows your misguided beliefs but your display more interest in your pride than the truth which is God. When someone belongs to a belief system that has not been in existence for even 200 years and that person believes them self to be more knowledgeable in all aspects of translating ancient Greek and Hebrew over and above every group of scholars who have served to translate and interpret and verify scripture for 2000 years, one expresses arrogances. That is not to speak of Russell’s justifying his beliefs with claims in direct opposition of scripture itself.

Is Jesus God… Absolutely. One in Being with the Father. You can claim he is not but no matter what you refer to Him as, if you deny Him to be God, you claim both He and the Heavenly Father are deceiving.

Matthew CH1; 23 11 “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel," which means "God is with us.”

John CH8; 14 Jesus answered and said to them, “Even if I do testify on my own behalf, my testimony can be verified, 6 because I know where I came from and where I am going**.** But you do not know where I come from or where I am going. 15 You judge by appearances, 7 but I do not judge anyone. 16 And even if I should judge, my judgment is valid, because I am not alone, but it is I and the father who sent me. 17 Even in your law 8 it is written that the testimony of two men can be verified. 18 I testify on my behalf and so does the Father who sent me.” 19 So they said to him, “Where is your father?” Jesus answered, “You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also.” 20 He spoke these words while teaching in the treasury in the temple area. But no one arrested him, because his hour had not yet come. 21910 He said to them again, “I am going away and you will look for me, but you will die in your sin. Where I am going you cannot come.” 22 11 So the Jews said, “He is not going to kill himself, is he, because he said, ‘Where I am going you cannot come’?” 23 He said to them, “You belong to what is below, I belong to what is above. You belong to this world, but I do not belong to this world. 24 That is why I told you that you will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I AM, 12 you will die in your sins.” 25 13 So they said to him, “Who are you?” Jesus said to them, “What I told you from the beginning. 26 I have much to say about you in condemnation. But the one who sent me is true, and what I heard from him I tell the world.” 27 They did not realize that he was speaking to them of the Father. 28 So Jesus said (to them), "When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will realize that I AM, and that I do nothing on my own, but I say only what the Father taught me.

Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

***God The Savior; ***

Isaiah 43:11"I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour."
1 John 4:14 “…the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.”

Titus CH2; 11 2 For the grace of God has appeared, saving all 12 and training us to reject godless ways and worldly desires and to live temperately, justly, and devoutly in this age, 13 as we await the blessed hope, the appearance 3 of the glory of the great God and of our savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to deliver us from all lawlessness and to cleanse for himself a people as his own, eager to do what is good.

Continued next post…

 

[twb1621]

To Dan
continued from previous post…

1 Timothy CH4; 10 … because we have set our hope on the living God, who is the savior of all, especially of those who believe.

Luke CH1; 41 When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the infant leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth, filled with the holy Spirit, 42 cried out in a loud voice and said, “Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. 43 **And how does this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord **14 should come to me? 44 For at the moment the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy. 45 Blessed are you who believed 15 that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled.” 46 And Mary said: 16 "My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord; 47 my spirit rejoices in God my savior.

2 Peter CH3; 18 But grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory now and to the day of eternity. (Amen.)

2 Peter CH1; 1 1 Symeon Peter, a slave and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have received a faith of equal value to ours through the righteousness of our God and savior Jesus Christ:

John CH4; 42 and they said to the woman, “We no longer believe because of your word; for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is truly the savior of the world.”

Titus CH1; 4 to Titus, my true child in our common faith: grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our savior.

Luke CH2; 11 5 For today in the city of David a **savior has been born for you who is Messiah and Lord. **

Acts CH4; 12 3 There is no salvation through anyone else, nor is there any other name under heaven given to the human race by which we are to be saved."

God The Creator Jesus;
Isaiah CH44; 24 Thus says the LORD, your redeemer, who formed you from the womb: I am the LORD, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens; when I spread out the earth, who was with me?

Genesis CH1; 1 In the beginning, when God created the heavens and the earth,
10 "At the beginning, O Lord, you established the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands.”

Colossians CH1; 16 For in him 8 were created all things in heaven and on earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things were created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

John CH1; 1 12 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 3 All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be. What came to be 4 through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race; 5 4 **the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. **
……14 And the Word became flesh 9 and made his dwelling among us, and we saw his glory, the glory as of the Father’s only Son, full of grace and truth.”

continued next post

 

[twb1621]

To Dan
continued from previous post…

Isaiah CH41; 4 …. I**, the LORD, am the first, and with the last I will also be.**

Rev CH1; 17 When I caught sight of him, I fell down at his feet as though dead. 16 He touched me with his right hand and said, "Do not be afraid. I am the first and the last,

Matthew Ch4; 10 At this, Jesus said to him, “Get away, Satan! It is written: 'The Lord, your God, shall you worship and him alone shall you serve.’”

Hebrews CH1; 5 2 For to which of the angels did God ever say: “You are my son; this day I have begotten you”? Or again: “I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me”? 6 And again, when he leads 3 the first-born into the world, he says: “**Let all the angels of God worship him.” **

The red text pretty much says it to denounce any claim Jesus and Saint Michael could be the same.

John CH20; 28 17 Thomas answered and said to him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 18 Jesus said to him, "Have you come to believe because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed."

There is much more available. By the way, I didn’t include some of the scripture I posted previously so they may be added to these.

So who’s wrong or deceitful Dan, God our Father or Jesus or both… or is it you who are misguided in what you believe? Honest question, Dan, but it has to be one of these answers.

 

[Dan_Parker]

Thanks for your reply Frances. Ah, the beauty and consistency of Sacred Tradition. It is something the JW’s only wish they had.

The Jews have/had a sacred tradition as well. But if one holds that tradition over Sacred Scripture what one has will be taken away from them. That is what happened to the Jews, as Jesus said: You have nullified the word of God for the sake of your tradition. (Mt 15:6)

 

[Danno2281]

Actually my comment was a play on words and a joke. I asked if Jesus was always in the world and you indicated he was. However the text does not say he was always in the world

My point is that the imperfect of EINAI does not indicate an existence prior to a point in the context. The NJB and NAB and other modern bibles understand what is happening in John 1:1-10. If that does not convince you then here is another example:

NAB John 1:15 John testified to him and cried out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘The one who is coming after me ranks ahead of me because **he existed = HN **before me.’”

On the earth John the baptizer existed before Jesus. The word is HN just like in John 1:1 and 1:10.

Note also the word “coming” in verse 15. This is the same word as in 1:8
NAB John 1:9 The true light, which enlightens everyone, was **coming **into the world.

This is also a technical term John uses for Jesus. In fact frequently in the gospels it is preceded by the definite article as in hO ERXOMENOS (the Coming One).

Back to John 1:15, you can see that HN is bounded by the context. Otherwise if you insist on the eternal HN John the baptizer is older than Jesus in the absolute sense and he also always existed.

You comfortably neglect 1Cor. 10,4, a clear statement that He was in the world prior to His incarnation.

 

[Danno2281]

Actually my comment was a play on words and a joke. I asked if Jesus was always in the world and you indicated he was. However the text does not say he was always in the world

My point is that the imperfect of EINAI does not indicate an existence prior to a point in the context. The NJB and NAB and other modern bibles understand what is happening in John 1:1-10. If that does not convince you then here is another example:

NAB John 1:15 John testified to him and cried out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘The one who is coming after me ranks ahead of me because **he existed = HN **before me.’”

On the earth John the baptizer existed before Jesus. The word is HN just like in John 1:1 and 1:10.

Note also the word “coming” in verse 15. This is the same word as in 1:8
NAB John 1:9 The true light, which enlightens everyone, was **coming **into the world.

This is also a technical term John uses for Jesus. In fact frequently in the gospels it is preceded by the definite article as in hO ERXOMENOS (the Coming One).

Back to John 1:15, you can see that HN is bounded by the context. Otherwise if you insist on the eternal HN John the baptizer is older than Jesus in the absolute sense and he also always existed.

Just for the record, the NAB and NJB, fine as they may be or not be, are not definitive for Catholics. The Vulgate is the definitive text, defined by the Council of Trent as such. You have consistently failed to address 1Cor.10,4. What are your thoughts on it, and how do you defend His “absence from the world” in the light of Paul’s assertion?

 

[Dan_Parker]

Just for the record, the NAB and NJB, fine as they may be or not be, are not definitive for Catholics. The Vulgate is the definitive text, defined by the Council of Trent as such. You have consistently failed to address 1Cor.10,4. What are your thoughts on it, and how do you defend His “absence from the world” in the light of Paul’s assertion?

I don’t deny he was in the world before his incarnation, but that is not what is being spoken of in the context of the prologue of John. Did you not see my comment on the joke (ie word play) in my previous post to you? Also see my post on the reason why the NAB and NJB render the verse this way.

Here is where we are:

1. You are attempting to defend the position that the word HN (was) in John 1:1 proves the Word existed eternally because of the force of the verbal form of that form of EINAI.
2. I have provided another example which refutes that proposition to which you have not responded, John 1:15. There Jesus says John the baptizer was before him using HN: PRWTOS MOU HN.
3. My argument no longer depends just upon John 1:9-10, the Latin Vulgate notwithstanding. The word HN is not used the way to which you appeal, and that is obvious from its use in the prologue at 1:15.

 

[Danno2281]

I don’t deny he was in the world before his incarnation, but that is not what is being spoken of in the context of the prologue of John. Did you not see my comment on the joke (ie word play) in my previous post to you?

Here is where we are:

1. You are attempting to defend the position that the word HN (was) in John 1:1 proves the Word existed eternally because of the force of the verbal form of that form of EINAI.
2. I have provided another example which refutes that proposition to which you have not responded, John 1:15. There Jesus says John the baptizer was before him using HN: PRWTOS MOU HN.
3. My argument no longer depends just upon John 1:9-10, the Latin Vulgate notwithstanding. The word HN is not used the way to which you appeal, and that is obvious from its use in the prologue at 1:15.

Please look again at Jn.1:15. It is JOHN who says that JESUS was before him.

 

[Dan_Parker]

Please look again at Jn.1:15. It is JOHN who says that JESUS was before him.

Ha! You are quite right. However this verse when compared to John 1:9-10 does harmonize that it was the Word who was coming into the World.

As for the word, HN, also note its use here:
NJB John 2:1 On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee. The mother of Jesus was = HN there,

Mary was at the wedding before Jesus but she was not always there.

 

[Danno2281]

Ha! You are quite right. However this verse when compared to John 1:9-10 does harmonize that it was the Word who was coming into the World.

As for the word, HN, also note its use here:
NJB John 2:1 On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee. The mother of Jesus was = HN there,

Mary was at the wedding before Jesus but she was not always there.

The copula has many functions, and temporal considerations are but one of them. It can indicate relative standing (en…pros ton Theon), condition (Mary was there), equivalence (Theos en ho Logos) including numerical, etc. I think that a laerge part of the proiblem is that you are takinjg as identical what is only a similar usage of the copula. Note please that there is a shift in tenses from aorist to present (En to phos…ho photize). The enlightening continues because men keep coming into the world, but He does not keep coming into the world. This change in tense is what drives Jerome to apply the continuing coming into the world to men ratrher than to the Word.

 

[LionHeart777]

going back to Justin Dan for a sec.,

in Jurgen’s Faith of the Early Fathers: Volume 1, in the Doctrinal index under the the subject “The Trinity”, in point #236, under the specific topic “In regard to the theophanies:” (page 417), he refers the reader to the following from St. Justin Martyr’s First Apology (page 54):

“These words [of the Prophets], then, have become the proof that Jesus Christ is the Son and Apostle of God, being of old the Word, appearing at one time in the guise of fire, and at another time as an incorporeal image. And now, by the will of God and for the sake of the human race, He has become man, and has born all the torments which the demons instigated the senseless Jews to inflict upon Him. . . . And again, as we have shown, Jesus, while still in the midst of the [Jews], said: ‘No one knows the Father except the Son nor the Son except the Father, and those to whom the Son has given a revelation (17).’”

(The Faith of The Early Fathers: Volume 1, Jurgens, William A. The Liturgical Press. Collegeville, Minnesota:1970. (pages 54 and 417.))

So, regarding what you said way back in the thread about Justin not speaking of Jesus as a theophany, I diasgree, as I believe Jurgen’s sees in the above passage a reference to Jesus as a theophony.

 

[LionHeart777]

Athenagoras on the Logos

“…**But if, in your surpassing intelligence, it occurs to you to inquire what is meant by the Son, I will state briefly that He is the first product of the Father, not as having been brought into existence (for from the beginning, God, who is the eternal mind νοῦς], had the Logos in Himself, being from eternity instinct with Logos λογικός]); **but inasmuch as He came forth to be the idea and energizing power of all material things, which lay like a nature without attributes, and an inactive earth, the grosser particles being mixed up with the lighter. The prophetic Spirit also agrees with our statements. ‘The Lord,’ it says, ‘made me, the beginning of His ways to His works.’ Proverbs 8:22 The Holy Spirit Himself also, which operates in the prophets, we assert to be an effluence of God, flowing from Him, and returning back again like a beam of the sun. Who, then, would not be astonished to hear men who speak of God the Father, and of God the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and who declare both their power in union and their distinction in order, called atheists? Nor is our teaching in what relates to the divine nature confined to these points; but we recognise also a multitude of angels and ministers, whom God the Maker and Framer of the world distributed and appointed to their several posts by His Logos, to occupy themselves about the elements, and the heavens, and the world, and the things in it, and the goodly ordering of them all.” (Athenagoras, A Plea for the Christians) (newadvent.org/fathers/0205.htm) (accessed 9/ 26/ 09) (emphasis mine)

I believe Jurgens gives a date of “…[ca. *A. D. 177]…” (Jurgens, pg. 69), for this work:

Jurgens as a source (including his “Doctrinal Index”):
(The Faith of The Early Fathers: Volume 1, Jurgens, William A. The Liturgical Press. Collegeville, Minnesota:1970. (pages 69-70 and ?417 (point # 256?))

 

[LionHeart777]

Here is St. Theophilus of Antioch on the Word and John 1:1, in his “…To Autolycus ca. *A. D. * 181]…” (Jurgens, 73.)

“You will say, then, to me: ‘You said that God ought not to be contained in a place, and how do you now say that He walked in Paradise?’ Hear what I say. The God and Father, indeed, of all cannot be contained, and is not found in a place, for there is no place of His rest; but His Word, through whom He made all things, being His power and His wisdom, assuming the person… of the Father and Lord of all, went to the garden in the person of God, and conversed with Adam. For the divine writing itself teaches us that Adam said that he had heard the voice. But what else is this voice but the Word of God, who is also His Son? Not as the poets and writers of myths talk of the sons of gods begotten from intercourse [with women], but as truth expounds,the Word, that always exists, residing within the heart of God. For before anything came into being He had Him as a counsellor, being His own mind and thought. But when God wished to make all that He determined on, He begot this Word, uttered… the first-born of all creation, not Himself being emptied of the Word [Reason], but having begotten Reason, and always conversing with His Reason. And hence the holy writings teach us, and all the spirit-bearing [inspired] men, one of whom, John, says, ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,’… showing that at first God was alone, and the Word in Him. Then he says, ‘The Word was God; all things came into existence through Him; and apart from Him not one thing came into existence.’ The Word, then, being God, and being naturally… produced from God, whenever the Father of the universe wills, He sends Him to any place; and He, coming, is both heard and seen, being sent by Him, and is found in a place.”(ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.iv.ii.ii.xxii.html) (accessed 9/ 26/ 09)

other work utilized:
The Faith of The Early Fathers: Volume 1, Jurgens, William A. The Liturgical Press. Collegeville, Minnesota:1970. (pages 73, 76 and 410)

 

[Dan_Parker]

The copula has many functions, and temporal considerations are but one of them. It can indicate relative standing (en…pros ton Theon), condition (Mary was there), equivalence (Theos en ho Logos) including numerical, etc. I think that a laerge part of the proiblem is that you are takinjg as identical what is only a similar usage of the copula. Note please that there is a shift in tenses from aorist to present (En to phos…ho photize). The enlightening continues because men keep coming into the world, but He does not keep coming into the world. This change in tense is what drives Jerome to apply the continuing coming into the world to men ratrher than to the Word.

Dan:
The problem is that you insist on a interpretation of HN as meaning eternity into the past (ie always existed), in spite of the fact that the Word was “in” the beginning and not before the beginning.

What this interpretation attempts to do here is to convert
EN ARCH HN hO LOGOS (in the beginning was the Word) to
PRO ARXH HN hO LOGOS (before the beginning was the Word).

There are no examples of HN which have this sense. What I have done is showed just a few examples in the GNT where HN cannot have this meaning.

What would be helpful is if you would provide a legitimate example other than your proof-text of John 1:1 where it means always existing.

Also, while the Vulgate may be the official Catholic translation, both the NJB and NAB carry the imprimatur and nil obstat, do they not? I should be able to exegete the passage using those texts on CAF without criticism.

Now, here is another example I should have thought of before:
NAB 1 John 1:1 What was = HN **from **the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we looked upon and touched with our hands concerns the Word of life –

The preposition APO (from) here can in no way be interpreted as that the Word existed before the beginning. In fact the context mandates that the existence of the Word start FROM the beginning.

The DR has the same rendering as there is no ambiguity in the Greek (or Latin I presume).