Biblical Universalist Discussion Forum
Welcome to my forum. Feel free to post a message.
|
||
| Return to Website | ||
 First |
 Prev |
 Reply |
 Forum |
Next  |
Last  |
| Viewing Page 1 of 1 (Total Posts: 1) |
| Author | Comment |
Mike Burke
 Jun 22, 07 - 12:40 AM |
The Word Was God
Here's part of a very interesting article that appears on Dan Sheridan's web site: We propose giving a few words of explanation upon the first verses of the Gospel of John, because upon several occasions, and in different places, friends have asked our opinion about a very subtle interpretation which is being promulgated by a certain section of Christendom, and which leads the reader to think that the inspired original tells us that the Word was a God...The Edition of the N.T. which contains this evil has both the Greek text and the translation side by side, and we have found it to be our repeated experience, that when pressed upon the point, those who use this edition, and so solemnly and impressively refer to the Greek, confess that they do not understand it, but have swallowed the interpretation of the passage as being truth, and with all the brazenness of ignorance brandish the magic reference to the "inspired original" to degrade Him Who is the glory of that blessed book...If any of our readers are confronted with one of these exponents of the "Greek original" whose interpretation we are considering, they might ask for an evidence of consistency by reading the translation given of another verse in the selfsame chapter, viz., verse 14. If kai Theos en ho logos means "and the Word was A God," why should not kai ho logos sarx egeneto be translated, "and the Word became A flesh"? Such a translation is manifestly absurd, yet it is based upon precisely the same argument, the absence of the article before the word flesh. We might multiply instances. Does ho Theos agape estin mean "The God is A love?" A moment's reflection will enable any reader to see the truth of the grammatical rule, that the article is employed to demonstrate, whilst its omission describes. "The God" points out the subject of the sentence, "is love" describes His essence. So "the Word became flesh" describes the sphere into which the Word came, namely flesh. So in John i. 1, "the Word" (demonstrative) was, so far as His essence is concerned, "God " (descriptive)...Before we deal more fully with these two verbs, there is one more verse in the first chapter that claims our attention. "No one hath seen God at any time" (verse 18). Here again the word Theos is without the article, and if treated as in the first verse would be rendered, "No one hath seen A God at any time!" God in His essence no one hath seen, yet such passages as Gen. 32:24-32; Josh. 5:I3-15; Ezek. 1:26-28, etc., are inspired truth. If the first verse had read, "the Word was the God," we should have to exclude both the Father and the Spirit from the Godhead, for the words being thus placed in apposition would have become exclusive. ( To read this article in it's entirety, cut and past the following url into your browser http://www.crossandthrone.com/articles/the-word-was-god ) |
| First |
Prev |
Reply |
Forum |
Next |
Last |
powered by
bravenet.com