Greek Grammar In Light of Historical Research

Topics related to Biblical languages.
DrWhofan1
Inactive Account
DrWhofan1
Inactive Account
Joined: October 20th, 2014, 10:14 pm

November 19th, 2016, 8:58 pm #11

Reformed Baptist:25740 wrote:
DrWhofan1:25737 wrote:
THAT is why knowing some Greek is helpful, as you sso very well pointed out that John wrote as he did to show Jesus was God, but also that Heand the Father are 2 seperate Persons...
Which is what the English says quite clearly!

However one needs to more then 'some greek' to argue with a JW on this point!

As for your assertion that the definite article (if used) would mean that the Word is the same as the Father in John 1:1 I am not convinced that is what the book you say you are reading actually says - I would suggest it says that it would mean that the words would be interchangeable (convertible terms). Hence it would mean in English: "the God was the word and the God" now, to be fair, you might be right on the implication people would draw from that (and that might be why John didn't use the article) - but what you claim is not what Robertson suggests :D


The purpose of the article is simply the make the subject plain.

Take for example:

"The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, theos an ho logos, the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. ho logos sarx egeneto (Jo. 1:14). It is true that ho theos an ho logos (convertible terms) would have been Sabellianism. See also ho theos agape estin (1 Jo.4:16). "God" and "love" are not convertible terms any more than "God" and "Logos" or "Logos" and "flesh." Cf. also hoi theristai angeloi eisin (Mt. 13:39), ho logos ho sos alatheia estin (Jo. 17:17), ho nomos hamartia; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea."[A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1934) p. 767-768.]
That makes more sense now....
Quote
Like
Share

larry joseph pearson
Invested Member
Joined: October 12th, 2011, 8:44 pm

November 19th, 2016, 9:03 pm #12

Dr. WhofanI, I have a question regarding your post. Have you been in dialogue with those that espouse the New World Translation Bible or have seen a copy of Benjamin Wilson's Emphatic Diaglott? I was just curious no offense given. The anarthrous construction is one reason ( i  would say unreasonable) that" a god" is used in the theology and NWTB of the Watchtower folk.
AMR nailed it with his rendering of John 1:1.

:tsu:
Quote
Like
Share

DrWhofan1
Inactive Account
DrWhofan1
Inactive Account
Joined: October 20th, 2014, 10:14 pm

November 21st, 2016, 3:54 pm #13

Just getting ready for them to be coming around, as they seem to target the Holidays, as they deem Christman to be pagan, and want to give to us the "truth"
Quote
Like
Share

Reformed Baptist
Leading Member
Reformed Baptist
Leading Member
Joined: November 20th, 2015, 5:59 pm

November 21st, 2016, 5:59 pm #14

DrWhofan1:25754 wrote:Just getting ready for them to be coming around, as they seem to target the Holidays, as they deem Christman to be pagan, and want to give to us the "truth"
Don't go to John 1:1 in your 'corrupt' bible - and if you try and argue from the Greek prepare to be tested on that subject. If you want to discuss the deity of Christ use the JWs own translation and use Hebrews 1 and ask them who it is talking about, then refer them back to Psalm 102:25-27 (which is quoted in v10-12) and ask them who that passage is about - they will usually say Jehovah - hey presto you have shown them that their own version of the Bible teaches that Jesus is Jehovah - normally they don't come back after that!
"George Whitefield said, "We are all born Arminians." It is grace that turns us into Calvinists." Spurgeon
Quote
Like
Share

DrWhofan1
Inactive Account
DrWhofan1
Inactive Account
Joined: October 20th, 2014, 10:14 pm

November 21st, 2016, 6:05 pm #15

Reformed Baptist:25757 wrote:
DrWhofan1:25754 wrote:Just getting ready for them to be coming around, as they seem to target the Holidays, as they deem Christman to be pagan, and want to give to us the "truth"
Don't go to John 1:1 in your 'corrupt' bible - and if you try and argue from the Greek prepare to be tested on that subject. If you want to discuss the deity of Christ use the JWs own translation and use Hebrews 1 and ask them who it is talking about, then refer them back to Psalm 102:25-27 (which is quoted in v10-12) and ask them who that passage is about - they will usually say Jehovah - hey presto you have shown them that their own version of the Bible teaches that Jesus is Jehovah - normally they don't back after that!
Will try that on them when they come around next time...
Quote
Like
Share