[B-Greek] John 1:1c

James Spinti JSpinti at Eisenbrauns.com
Wed Jul 5 14:29:27 EDT 2006


Has anybody thought about checking the Patristic evidence? They knew
Greek :) And, they argued all this stuff out extensively, for about two
hundred years (B-Greek hasn't been doing it that long--yet!).

Unfortunately the IVP ACCS volume on John isn't done, so I don't know of
an easy way to get it all.  Maybe a search for John 1:1 in an electronic
version of the Nicene/Ante-Nicene/Post-Nicene Fathers?

I realize that some of you will claim theological bias on the part of
the fathers, but Eusebius wasn't exactly Nicene in theology.

Just a thought.

James

________________________________
James Spinti
Marketing Director, Book Sales Division
Eisenbrauns, Good books for over 30 years
Specializing in Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical Studies
jspinti at eisenbrauns dot com
Web: http://www.eisenbrauns.com
Phone: 574-269-2011 ext 226
Fax: 574-269-6788 

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org 
> [mailto:b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of 
> Awohili at aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 1:37 PM
> To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> Cc: Awohili at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] John 1:1c
> 
> 
>  
>  
> Another very early translation of John's Greek text is that 
> of the Coptic  
> Sahidic version (probably 2nd/3rd century).  The Egyptian 
> Copts were quite  
> familiar with Koine, which was introduced to Egypt from the 
> time of Alexander,  
> and was still a spoken language at the time, and were careful 
> translators of the 
>  NT.  Many textual critics recognize the value of the Coptic 
> NT for their  
> field of study, considering it to be as relevant as the 
> Vulgate and the  
> Peshitta, for example..
>  
> The Sahidic Coptic translation of John 1:1b says,
>  
> auw p.SaJe ne.F.Soop n.naHr.m p.noute,
>  
> meaning, "and the Word was (existing) *in the presence of* the God."
>  
> Thus, they translated Greek PROS by their word *naHrn* (duly 
> conjugated),  
> signifying that this One was in God's presence, or in 
> intimate association with  
> Him.
>  
> Solomon Landers
>  .
>  
> In a message dated 07/05/2006 10:06:58 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
> frjsilver at optonline.net writes:
> 
> 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'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> 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