Does John 1:1 tell us that Jesus is God or a god?

unsplash

IF YOU DON’T THINK THIS IS OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE YOU HAVE NOT BEEN PAYING ATTENTION.

I wonder if there are many other words in the Bible that have had so many column inches spent on them than the innocuous little “a” at the end of this verse?

You may be aware that people at the east end of the Mediterranean Sea did not speak Elizabethan English in Biblical Times, and we rely on documents written in the dialect of Greek at that time. (Just joshing ya. Of course you know.)

The startling thing is, there is no Greek equivalent of “a."

SO, IT IS A CONUNDRUM OF GREEK GRAMMAR WHICH HAS BECOME A FESTERING SORE OF CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY.

This is not a trivial subject

Fortunately, there are short version and long version answers.

The short answer.

One of the contenders for World Champion Greek Geek, Dan Wallace, devotes 15 pages in his book, ‘Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics,’ to John 1:1. An article by him on his insights is presented in The Puritan Board. A précis is given here. In layman’s language he is saying that, “and the Word was God,” remains true.

Wallace argues that in John 1:1c the Logos (“the Word”) is the subject (marked by the article on λόγος), while θεὸς (“God”), lacking the article and fronted for emphasis, functions as a qualitative anarthrous predicate nominative. This construction conveys “what God was, the Word was,” affirming the Word’s full divine essence without identifying Him as the Father. Hence, the proper translation remains “and the Word was God,” countering both Arian (“a god”) and Sabellian (“the God”) misreadings by distinguishing essence (qualitative θεὸς) from person (the distinct, articulated subject).

The complete article is HERE. It is not very long.

A lot of people write books and articles — but there is only one Professor Dan Wallace.

So that’s it. You’ve got it directly from the mouth of the Top Gun. You can go on to more important things.

Yet, a can of worms has been opened.

The anthem of NT Saints is, “God is Love,” as is written in 1 John 4:16 || And we have known and believed the love that God has for us. God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God in him.

That can’t be denied! But if the logic and syntax of John 1:1 being “a god” is consistent, 1 John 4:16 should be translated, “God is a Love” because Agapē is a noun. This will become apparent in the long answer.

However . . . Professor Wallace maybe Top Gun Geek but the movies tell us there is always a Young Gun who wants to take the title.

Is there a Topper Gun?

Yes, the Logos Himself.

But first it is necessary to see what a dog’s breakfast there is.

HOW DO WE SOLVE IT?

The long answer.

I’ve been interested in this situation for more years than I care to remember and have always ended up in the same place — someone’s opinion based on secular reasoning which actually turns out to be circular reasoning — with, “My theologian is better than your theologian. He wrote a book that is thicker than your theologian.”

Opinion is not useless. However, it is the most democratic of all methods for transferring ideas in that everyone has equal opportunity to be wrong. “I believe ….” is of no use to me.

“It is written ….” is what I’m after.

He (Jesus) said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.

To be honest, your theologian doesn’t impress me unless he can offer me Eternal Life.

IF YOUR PRACTICE DOESN’T AGREE WITH YOUR THEORY — GO BACK AND CHECK YOUR THEORY.

Perusing the miles of column inches on this topic it is obvious that there is a number of clever, plausible conclusions but plausible does not mean true. That there are an unspecified number of interpretations is true but incomplete. It does not specify, or even imply, that there are an unspecified number of VALID interpretations.

Everyone has a bias. On what evidence does one establish that bias?

There is just soooo much noise.

Most of this muddies the water so, as the investigation proceeds, the fools’ errands will be eliminated in order to declutter.

Firstly define the problem.

The reference translations will be the New World Translation (NWT) of the Jehovah’s Witnesses (JW), and well known New King James Version (NKJV). The NWT has been chosen because the JWs are one of the most vociferous that Jesus is a created being.

It can be seen that there is an “a” in the NWT that is not in the NKJV. But more about that soon.

This is a Greek Grammar topic so the Greek things must be clarified for English readers.

There are a number of New Testament (NT) Greek copies but these can be distilled down to two primary influences: The Textus Receptus, from Antioch, and the Morphological Greek New Testament from Alexandria. Both of these are presented here to prevent any arguments about different sources. Some differences do occur in the different editions but it can be seen that these texts are identical for this verse.

It can be seen that there is potential confusion right from thee start because the order of the English wording is different to the direct translation of the Greek. This is of no consequence because, while word order in English and Hebrew is critical, the rules of syntax in Greek render the word order not very critical (long story) so the rearrangement of the words for English has no affect on the idea being conveyed.

Examining the Greek text it will be seen that there are letters/words that appear in the table below.

It is not necessary to remember these items. They are added just in case you are puzzled.

Number: Sing = singular, Pl = plural.

Case: Nom = nominative, Gen = genitive, Dat = dative, Acc = accusative.

Gender: Masc = masculine, fem = Feminine, Neut = neuter.

This is one of the strengths of Greek. They give precision in articulating nouns, pronouns and adjectives which are linked. As can be seen, there are 24.

ALSO — THERE IS NO INDEFINITE ARTICLE IN GREEK. (The indefinite article will be explained soon.)

I could tell you that no Greek noun/pronoun/adjective has an associated indefinite article and I would be telling the truth.

I could tell you that every Greek noun/pronoun/adjective has an associated definite article (the definite is redundant because there is no indefinite) but I’d be lying. All Greek nouns have a definite article . . . except the ones which don’t. For some reason (unknown to my Greek speaking friends) some nouns have no article at all.

This is called an anarthrous substantive for short. (Refer to Professor Wallace above.) Which means nothing to me, either, except that anarthrous is a term in entomology which means an insect without joints, or having the joints indistinct. An apt description for what is happening here.

A rough mathematical analogy to this linguistic occurrence would be having one equation with more than one unknowns. There would be numerous potential solutions depending on assumed values. If this . . . then that. Nothing would be definite → opinions based on assumptions, which is then presented as fact.

Can the other Biblical languages be of assistance? (A quick Google will confirm these.)

English has two articles — the definite article → “the/that/this” and the indefinite article → “a/an.”

The definite article, the, is the most frequent word in English. It is used because there is specifically only one. The indefinite article, a or an, refer to non-specific or unknown nouns. (The a or an depends on the spelling of the noun, so there is essentially only one.)

Hebrew has only one article, the definite article, הַ (ha), meaning “the.” It doesn’t have indefinite articles like “a” or “an” — context does the heavy lifting there.

So no help can come from going down the Hebrew trail. The Hebrew/Greek interaction has a number of friction points (another story for another time) as does English/Greek. How does one mesh one definite and one indefinite with 24 definite articles?

THE GREEK ARTICLE FUNCTIONS VERY DIFFERENTLY FROM THE ENGLISH “THE."

• The Greek changes form to specify the gender, number and case of a noun/pronoun → specific.

• The English doesn’t change form so is not so specific.

• English has the indefinite article. Greek doesn’t. Be careful of injecting the English indefinite into Greek. [This has to be constantly repeated because it is happening constantly.]

What about other Middle Eastern languages?

Coptic language which has a definite article (as in “the” in English) and an indefinite article (as in “a” or “an” in English) has been proposed but it obviously has the same snags as English. So that line is a fools errand and can be eliminated — the decluttering begins.

What about the Church Fathers?

This is an oft used refuge of (sic)modern scholarship but I look at the Letters to the Seven Churches which open The Revelation and see that the Boss was not overjoyed with everything that was going on then.

More decluttering → less noise → now we can hear ourselves think.

So it appears I’ve shot myself in the foot. There is nowhere else to go.

Not so. God knows a lot more tricks than the Intellectual Glitterati give Him credit for.

A Bible literate Communications Engineer, who knows the Narrative, recognises that the Bible has been designed in anticipation of hostile jamming.

What has this got to do with Theology? Lots.

Who hasn’t seen a World War 2 movie showing some resistance agent in Nazi Occupied Europe tuning in a radio to receive a message coming from London? The signal was always bad. That was not poor technology, it was deliberate. The signal was being broadcast over the entire available bandwidth. If the signal was bunched into a concentrated beam it would be clear but easily jammed. It is impossible to jam the entire bandwidth.

It is intriguing to notice that the Biblical text evidences these same techniques.

Here is an extract from a teaching by Koinonia Institute.

"Where is the chapter on baptism? Or salvation? Or any specific critical doctrine? Every major theme is spread throughout the 66 books making up the total message. There is no concentration of any critical element in any single location. One can tear out a surprising number of pages and still not lose visibility of the essential message. (Some resolution or clarity would be lost, however.) This design intent of distributing the vital elements throughout the entire message system gives a new perspective to Isaiah 28:10 || For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept, Line upon line, line upon line, Here a little, there a little. 28:10 "

כּי צו לצו צו לצו קו לקו קו לקו זעיר שׁם זעיר שׁם

So what?

Martin Luther is reported to have given the following advice about parts of the Bible that are hard to understand. Find the meaning of the parts of the difficult texts of the Bible with those that are easily understood.

Where else is the topic of Christ’s divinity settled?

JESUS IS CUTE BUT JEHOVAH’S A BRUTE?

Did Jesus say He was God?

Conclusion

The best Scholar use as a reference to investigate the Bible is the Holy Spirit. Relying on what Man says is dicing with death.

A lot of emotional energy has been needlessly spent over the years on a single, indeterminate situation which has been decided several places elsewhere. Could there be particular agendas at play? Surely not.

There is an old Hebrew proverb, “Paying attention is more important than thinking.”

I must admit, I got caught up in it myself.

The forgoing evidence has not been presented to convince any reader but to allow a personal decision to be made. There is much more to know about this subject. Perhaps you’ll pay another visit, sometime. If you have seen something you like, I encourage plagiarism. So, always check everything I say first, then please re-cycle, re-brand, re-structure, re-issue, re-label, or regurgitate in any manner you please. No need to acknowledge me because it is the Holy Spirit Who holds the Intellectual Rights.

All Glory to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

(We all have a plank in our eye. It’s bigger than we think.)

ネ

© Brad Banardict