Theon v Theos in Greek

[anrmenchaca47]

I’m sorry if this was already done. But when it come to the Greek Theon and Theos are both translated to mean ‘God.’ This is in reference to John 1:1. I had a discussion with a JW to prove that Jesus is God by using the Greek…and wouldn’t you know it…they used a Greek that adds “a god.” He also point out that the two are different because of the spelling. So can someone explain the difference of Theon and Theos?

 

[edward_george1]

Greek is a highly inflected language, meaning that the function of the word in the sentence depends on its ending, and not on where it occurs in the sentence. Theos is declined in the nominative case, which means its functions as the subject of the sentence. Theon is the accusative, which means it is functioning as the direct object of the sentence. They aren’t “different because of the spelling,” at least not in meaning. They’re different in their function in the sentence. And besides that, if they were different in meaning, do you really think something that important would’ve been lying in plain sight this whole time? I mean, how did everybody make such a simple mistake for 1800 years until the JWs came along?

Gotta love theological arguments that can be taken apart with day one of intro to ancient Greek…

-Fr ACEGC

 

[Fauken]

I mean, how did everybody make such a simple mistake for 1800 years until the JWs came along?

Not to mention that the committee that created their transition didn’t have a single person on the who understood Koine Greek. One guy had a basic (if even that) understanding of modern Greek. So 1800 years of incorrect understanding was rectified by a committee that had no background in the subject. Hmm…

 

[BartholomewB]

Adding a detail to @edward_george1’s point about Greek grammar and inflections. It may possibly come in handy in your conversation with your JW friend. He is presumably familiar with the fish symbol used in the early Church, based on an acrostic representing the initial letters of the Greek words for “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.” The word for “of God” here is theou, which is the same noun theos in the genitive case, indicating a possessive. Or do the JWs claim it is yet another different God?

 

[Hodos]

The person you were talking to has no idea how Greek works. Let me explain how the greek noun system works, then I will explain why they have a false understanding of John 1:1c.

In English we tend to order our sentences in such a way that the subject of the sentence comes first, and the direct or indirect object of the verb comes after the verb. So for example: John (subject) kicked the ball (direct object). Generally, the way a noun is being used is dictated by its position in the sentence.

Greek doesn’t work that way. In Greek, the sequence of the wording has quite a bit of flexibility, and word order often has less to do with which noun is functioning in what way. As a matter of fact, Greek often uses word order to show emphasis, so saying something first in the sentence even though the sequence or thought flow doesn’t quite follow that order, is the author’s way of saying this is really important. Paul does this for example in Ephesians 2:8 when he says For by grace you have been saved through faith. In English we would normally say, “You (subject) have been saved (passive verb) by grace (the indirect object performing the action) through faith (a prepositional phrase explaining the agent by which grace is working).” Paul however, flips the word order of the sentence to place emphasis on the grace.

So as demonstrated, word order doesn’t dictate noun function. So how do the Greeks determine which noun is acting in what way? They use case endings which are added to the root of the noun. So every noun has a root that carries the meaning of the word. In the case of John 1:1, it would be Theo (God). We add a case ending to the noun root to tell us how the noun is functioning in the sentence. When the noun is functioning as the subject of the sentence, we say it is in the nominative case. To do so, we add a sigma to the end of the noun root, which gives us the word Theos. If we want the word to function as a direct object, we say that the noun root is taking the accusative case, and add a nu to the end of the word, giving us the word Theon. The word means the same thing, it is just operating as a different grammatical function.

 

[Hodos]

Now, let’s work through John 1:1. I will use phoenetic English spellings of the greek to illustrate.

“Ev archn nv o logos, kai o logos nv pros tov Theov, kai Theos nv o logos.”

The first clause means “In the beginning was (was existing would be more appropriate) the word.” Notice that the logos (word) is in the nominative case with the sigma at the end. The second clause means “And the word (the subject of the clause) was (was existing) with (with, toward, facing) God (accusative case).” Note here the logos is in the nominative case as the subject of the clause, and God who is receiving the action of the verb is in the accusative as the direct object. Also note that at this point the word Theos is used in reference to the Father only (this is John’s normative, but not only use of the word Theos). The last clause is tricky because it uses a predicate nominative construction because the author is making an equative statement. He is saying this (one of the nouns) is the same as this (the other noun). This construction is frequently used in Greek when using the verb “to be”. Because he is saying that one thing is equal to another both nouns will be in the subjective case. However, the way a Greek speaker would distinguish which noun is actually functioning as the subject of the verb would be to place the definite article o before the noun. The noun that is modifying the subject would be anarthrous (the definite article is not used). So in John 1:1c, the translation is “and God was the Word”. However, the meaning of the sentence is properly translated so that the subject comes first for English readers as “and the Word (subject) was (was being as, was existing as) God (equative noun).” Note that here the author is communicating that in its nature the Logos is God (divine), yet it doesn’t confuse the Logos with the Father as if they are the same person. So the JW you are talking with doesn’t understand the predicate nominative or how it is used. Note also that the author has place the word for God in the emphatic position emphasizing The Word’s nature as God. This same construction is used in 1 John 4:8 where he says God is love (o Theos agape estiv) where God (the subject) is articular - uses the definite article to distinguish which noun is the subject - and the nominative case for love is anarthrous - the article is omitted to distinguish it as the equative noun. Ask him if the New World Translation translates it as God is “a love” and see if he goes into a tailspin. Same thing for 1 John 1:5 when John says God is light (not “a light”). His translation is breaking the rules of Greek grammar to make it say what he wants it to say.