Tov Rose (The Happy Theologist)

Tov Rose (The Happy Theologist)

Share this post

Tov Rose (The Happy Theologist)
Tov Rose (The Happy Theologist)
Notes in the Correct Interpretation of John 1:1

Notes in the Correct Interpretation of John 1:1

Tov Rose
Aug 26, 2017
∙ Paid

Share this post

Tov Rose (The Happy Theologist)
Tov Rose (The Happy Theologist)
Notes in the Correct Interpretation of John 1:1
Share

<< He was the same as God appears in most translations as “the Word was God” [Revised Standard Version (RSV), JB, NAB]. NEB renders by “what God was, the Word was” and Mft “the Logos was divine” [Goodspeed(Gdsp) “the Word was divine”]. Zürcher Bibel [Zür] has “the Word was God,” with a footnote indicating that this means the Word possessed a divine nature.

These many differences in translation are due to the Greek sentence structure. In this type of equational sentence in Greek (A = B) the subject can be distinguished from the predicate by the fact that the subject has the article before it and the predicate does not. Since “God” does not have the article preceding it, “God” is clearly the predicate and “the Word” is the subject. This means that “God” is here the equivalent of an adjective, and this fact justifies the rendering he (the Word) was the same as God. John is not saying that “the Word” was God the Father, but he is affirming that the same divine predication can be made of “t…

This post is for paid subscribers

Already a paid subscriber? Sign in
© 2025 Tov Rose
Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Start writingGet the app
Substack is the home for great culture

Share