[B-Greek] John 1:1c
Dave Smith (REL110, 211,212)
rel21x at charter.net
Wed Jul 5 14:10:14 EDT 2006
The Syriac Peshitta has LOT, which is also similar to the Latin apud, and is
not the normal word for "with," but more like at, towards, or against.
Dave Smith
Hudson, NC
----- Original Message -----
From: <frjsilver at optonline.net>
To: "Rolf Furuli" <furuli at online.no>
Cc: <B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 13:05
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] John 1:1c
Dear Friends --
Perhaps the crux of the matter isn't the anarthrous predicative construction
in 1c so much as the PROS in 1b, which has given us some food for thought.
I notice that Latin renders PROS as _apud_; Church Slavonic, a little more
literally, has _k"_ while Modern Russian renders this as _u_, much more like
the Latin. Yet Modern Greek versions (no stable translations of the
scriptures as yet) variously give the original PROS and -- to my taste --
the oddly appropriated PARA.
Yet none of these languages suggests 'with' (or anything like it). Rather,
all of them, with the weak exception of Church Slavonic, have much more the
flavor of 'at'.
This is probably the evangelist's poetic shorthand for what was later
articulated as the trinitarian PERICWRHSIS (interpenetration or reciprocity)
informing some of his other statements which he attributes to Jesus, such as
EGW KAI hO PATHR hEN ESMEN (10:30) and hO hEWRAKWS EME hEWRAKE TON PATERA
(14:9).
Trusting that this brief comparison won't overstep our guidelines, and
without getting exegetical, I wanted only to suggest that some basic ground
rules for discussion must include our understanding that the evangelist has
it in mind to assert that QEOS = PATHR, that LOGOS = IHSOUS, and that QEOS
and LOGOS are equal yet distinct.
Or so John's use of Greek seems to me.
Peace and blessings to all.
Father James Silver
Monk James
Orthodox Church in America
----- Original Message -----
From: Rolf Furuli
Date: Wednesday, July 5, 2006 12:05 pm
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] John 1:1c
To: B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> Dear Barry,
>
> See my comments below.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Barry"
> To: "'Rolf Furuli'"
> Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 1:12 PM
> Subject: RE: [B-Greek] John 1:1c
>
>
> snip
>
> RF:
> > The English rendering "And the Word was God" is linguistically
> impossible> because:
> >
> > 1) In English, "God" (with capital "G") is equivalent to a
> proper noun,
> and
> > this makes "the Word" and "God" in the clause convertible
> terms, that is,
> > "the Word" and "God" are identical in all respects.
>
> BH:
> This is, I believe, an assumption that you are reading into the
> Englishtranslation, and not a necessary interpretation of the
> English. To
> capitalize a bit on an example offered in another post:
>
> Both John and Jane are man."
>
> Now, this is an older usage of the term which to many modern
> speakers sounds
> "sexist," but the meaning is clear, that both John and Jane are human
> beings. They are not, however, identical in all respects, but
> both share
> the quality of "manness" or humanity.
>
> RF:
> I am not a native English speaker, so I do not have the same
> linguisticintuition as you.
> However, I think that the crucial issue in the English
> trandtional rendering
> of John 1:1c is more related to linguistics than to intuition.
> This is the crucial issue: Is the word "God" with capital "G" in
> English a
> singular noun which is equivalent to a proper name? If that is
> the case, the
> words "the Word" and "God" in the rendering "and the Word was
> God" are
> convertible terms. That would mean that the Word and God in
> every respect
> are identical. Your example above is not relevant, since "man"
> is not a
> proper name, but the following examples may illustrate the case:
>
> 1) Jesus is YHWH.
>
> 2) Jesus is the Father.
>
> In 1) the nominative predicate is a proper name, and in 2) the
> nominativepredicate is a singular noun which is equivalent to a
> proper name. The only
> possible interpretation of the two propositions that I see, is
> that Jesus
> and YHWH are identical in every respect and the same is true
> with Jesus and
> the Father. One
> commentator who views the word "God" as I have argued above, is
> M. J.
> Harris. His book "Jesus as God: The New Testament Use of Theos
> in Reference
> to Jesus" (1992) is the most thorough treatment of John 1:1 and
> relatedpassages of which I am aware. On page 69 Harris says:
> "But in normal English
> usage "God" is a proper noun...Moreover, "the word was God"
> suggests that
> "the Word" and "God" are convertible terms, that the proposition is
> reciprocating.". It would be interesting to hear from one or
> more of the
> linguists on the list if there are serious objections to the
> views of Harris
> and myself,
>
> RF:
> > 2) That the words are convertible terms and reciprocate is
> forbidden by
> the
> > use of preposition in 1:1b (and suggested by the lack of
> article before
> QEOS
> > in 1:1c). It is linguistical nonsense to make a text saying
> that someone
> "is
> > with" someone else and at the same time is identical with that one.
>
> BH:
> Rolf, this is quite amusing, actually. You have just done what
> you have
> stated is linguistically impossible.
>
> RF:
> I do not understand what you mean here.
>
> BH:
> However, you are introducing an
> interpretive rather than a linguistic category here, the term
> "identical."I believe that John goes on to demonstrate that the
> LOGOS shares in the
> essential quality of what it means to be QEOS, but also
> demonstrates that
> the LOGOS has certain, shall we say, personal properties which
> distinguishhim from QEOS as the generically understood hO QEOS.
> The point here,
> however, is that there is nothing inherently impossible about
> making this
> sort of statement, either in Greek or English. The problem is in
> understanding what John intends by the statement.
>
> RF:
> I respect your right to have your opinion regarding the meaning
> of John´s
> words. However, if "God" in normal English is equivalent to a
> proper name,
> the rendering "and the Word was God" contradicts your
> explanations above.
>
> N.E. Barry Hofstetter
> Adjunct Faculty & IT Support
> The Center for Urban Theological Studies
> http://www.cuts.edu
> Classics Instructor, The American Academy
> http://www.theamericanacademy.net
>
> And my site:
>
> http://mysite.verizon.net/nebarry
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rolf Furuli
> University of Oslo
>
>
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
>
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list