Logos Not God from John 1

[blackfish152]

In dialogue with a famous muslim who came to my university today, I attempted to describe the holy Trinity to him, as he found it a major problem that we “worship 3 gods”

I said :

Christians believe in One God who has a will. The will is expressed through his Word, (which is the agent of creation also), this is carried out by the power of his spirit.

I tried to show him that this is our view and also ironically enough the islamic view. As the Quran talks of the word and spirit of allah. not seperate entities of them selves but distinct attributes of God.

I tried to develop the point by saying that Christ was the Word from John 1. He claims that the Greek usage of the word God/god is not supportive of this conclusion.

Any thoughts on this? and how I could refute him?

May the Blessings of the Trinity be upon all of us.

m.

 

[Scott_Waddell]

I don’t know how you would refute someone in stubborn denial when confronted with the black and white “and the logos was god” and later this logos became flesh. It’s 2+2=4, and no amount of Greek wrangling is going to make it otherwise.

What alternative does he offer? Why would John bother writing such an alternative?

Scott

 

[jimmy]

blackfish152:

In dialogue with a famous muslim who came to my university today, I attempted to describe the holy Trinity to him, as he found it a major problem that we “worship 3 gods”

I said :

Christians believe in One God who has a will. The will is expressed through his Word, (which is the agent of creation also), this is carried out by the power of his spirit.

I tried to show him that this is our view and also ironically enough the islamic view. As the Quran talks of the word and spirit of allah. not seperate entities of them selves but distinct attributes of God.

I tried to develop the point by saying that Christ was the Word from John 1. He claims that the Greek usage of the word God/god is not supportive of this conclusion.

Any thoughts on this? and how I could refute him?

May the Blessings of the Trinity be upon all of us.

m.

He is wrong. I have looked at the greek of John1;1 and there is no problem with it. Now, he may be refering to the fact that there is no article in the greek that says the Word is THE God, but that does not change that it says that “the Word is God”.

 

[Scott_Waddell]

jimmy:

Now, he may be refering to the fact that there is no article in the greek that says the Word is THE God, but that does not change that it says that “the Word is God”.

Right. He can’t just say it means “the Word was a god” and walk away triumphant. It is his assertion, so he must supply an alternative and explain what god he thinks it is.

Scott

 

[blackfish152]

To clarify — The muslim man, claimed that my interperation was false. As the Greek says something like: In the beg. was the Word and the Word was with God and the word was god ?

is the same greek word used here in this context for God, used also for the devil in another part of holy scripture as god?

very confused?

Live for Christ.

 

[Scott_Waddell]

blackfish152:

To clarify — The muslim man, claimed that my interperation was false. As the Greek says something like: In the beg. was the Word and the Word was with God and the word was god ?

is the same greek word used here in this context for God, used also for the devil in another part of holy scripture as god?

very confused?

Live for Christ.

I’m confused too. Is he trying to distinguish between the upper case ‘God’ and lowercase ‘god’? No such distinction because the original was in aramaic (which has long vanished) and in the copies ALL the letters are in uppercase. The word here is “theos” in both instances.

Scott

 

[blackfish152]

1.The word was with God
2.The word was God.

the Muslim claimed that in 1 . the word God was the word fitting for the true God and in 2. the word used didnt mean God in the true sense of the word, in the sense used in the first sense.My use of small g as opposed to capital G for God was to indicate what he was suggesting. That is that the 2 uses of the word were fundamentally different and suggested that Our Lord was not himself of divine substance, so to speak.

 

[catsrus]

Is the muslim “studying” to be a jw? The God versus god argument is the same one they use.

 

[candrew]

catsrus:

The God versus god argument is the same one they use.

Which is linguistically wrong. The verse goes like this:

En arche en ho Logos, kai ho Logos en pros ton Theon, kai Theos en ho Logos.

You can argue semantics and hidden meanings till you’re blue in the face. It says what it says. Christ is the Word, and in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word WAS God.

End of story.

 

[jimmy]

blackfish152:

To clarify — The muslim man, claimed that my interperation was false. As the Greek says something like: In the beg. was the Word and the Word was with God and the word was god ?

is the same greek word used here in this context for God, used also for the devil in another part of holy scripture as god?

very confused?

Live for Christ.

That is a destinction that can not be made. Here is the greek.

en arch hn o logoV, kai o logoV hn proV ton qeon, kai qeoV hn o logoV.

qeon and qeoV are two different forms of the same word. qeoV is the nominative masculine singular form and qeon is the accusative masculine singular form. If you know greek or latin, you know that the nominative is used to denote the subject and the accusative denotes the direct object.

This first one is for qeon

CaseANumberSGenderMqeoV,n {theh’-os}

1. a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities 2) the Godhead, trinity 2a) God the Father, the first person in the trinity 2b) Christ, the second person of the trinity 2c) Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity 3) spoken of the only and true God 3a) refers to the things of God 3b) his counsels, interests, things due to him 4) whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way 4a) God’s representative or viceregent 4a1) of magistrates and judges

This one is for qeoV

CaseNNumberSGenderMqeoV,n {theh’-os}

1. a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities 2) the Godhead, trinity 2a) God the Father, the first person in the trinity 2b) Christ, the second person of the trinity 2c) Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity 3) spoken of the only and true God 3a) refers to the things of God 3b) his counsels, interests, things due to him 4) whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way 4a) God’s representative or viceregent 4a1) of magistrates and judges

Both words mean the same thing, god or God. The difference is only in how it fits in the sentence, theos is a subject and the theon is a direct object. In the case with the third part of the sentence the direct object and the subject are the same thing so they are in the same case. The dirrect translation would be

en arch hn o logoV, kai o logoV hn proV ton qeon, kai qeoV hn o logoV.

en(“en”) means “in”, arch(“archa”) means “begining”, hn (“ain”) is an aurist tense 3rd person active verb meaning “be”(translated as “was” in the aurist tense), o logoV (the article plus “logos”) means “the word”, kai (“kai”)means “and”, o logoV as said above means “the word”, hn as said above is aurist tense and means “to be”, proV (pros) is translated as “with”, ton qeon (the article plus "theon) is translated “God”, kai (“kai”) means “and”, qeoV (theos) means god, godess, God, hn (“ain”) is aurist for “to be”, o logoV translates as "the word.

“In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God(the god), and God was the word.”

greekbible.com/

 

[jimmy]

1.The word was with God
2.The word was God.

the Muslim claimed that in 1 . the word God was the word fitting for the true God and in 2. the word used didnt mean God in the true sense of the word, in the sense used in the first sense.My use of small g as opposed to capital G for God was to indicate what he was suggesting. That is that the 2 uses of the word were fundamentally different and suggested that Our Lord was not himself of divine substance, so to speak.

No, he can not draw that from the text. That is not true.

 

[otm]

You all can argue until you are blue in the face, but from the earliest Church, the Church has held that there is one God. Ask him to show any orthodx Catholic writings from the first, second or third centuries that support his view.

He can argue all he wants about how to interpret the Greek, but it is our Book, not his, and we have interpreted it as One God, in spite of his claims.

 

[vern_humphrey]

“Word” (“logos”) in Greek can also mean “reason” (as in “intellect.”) The Greeks considered speaking and reasoning to be the same thing. The passage can therefore be taken to mean that God is an intellect – being of thought, not of body, and this thought was incarnate.

(This, by the way, is good cause for believing John wrote in Greek, not in Aramaic…)

 

[challenger]

The predicate nominative is identified by its lack of a definite article. Flip through your Greek New Testament- you will see countless references to God without a definite article, with the context clearly specifying it is the Father.

 

[jeffreedy789]

I tried to develop the point by saying that Christ was the Word from John 1.

your questions seems to ask if Christ was logos, rather than if logos is God.

if that’s the case, then refer him to verse 14, which says ‘and the became flesh and dwelt among us.’

that seems to cinch it.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

Writing to the original post,

What does he mean not supportive of this conclusion?

I think you allowed someone to take away your priority in interpreting your own tradition. The text CAN mean what you said it meant, so he has the burden of disproving your tradition.

If he believes that the passage shows more than one God, you need to politely ask him to show why it must. Otherwise, reassert that Christians do not worship 3 gods and the passage does not pose a problem to Christians.

eg. I do not worship three Gods, and the passage does not require me to believe in three Gods. So I interpret it the way which does not cause a problem. etc. (Perhaps you are more diplomatic than I am.)