“The Word Was God”? The Word was with God.?

Question

AT JOHN 1:1 the King James Version reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Trinitarians claim that this means that “the Word” (Greek, ho lo′gos) who came to earth as Jesus Christ was Almighty God himself.

Note, however, that here again the context lays the groundwork for accurate understanding. Even the King James Version says, “The Word was with God.” (Italics ours.) Someone who is “with” another person cannot be the same as that other person. In agreement with this, the Journal of Biblical Literature, edited by Jesuit Joseph A. Fitzmyer, notes that if the latter part of John 1:1 were interpreted to mean “the” God, this “would then contradict the preceding clause,” which says that the Word was with God.

Notice, too, how other translations render this part of the verse:

1808: “and the word was a god.” The New Testament in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text.

1864: “and a god was the word.” The Emphatic Diaglott, interlinear reading, by Benjamin Wilson.

1928: “and the Word was a divine being.” La Bible du Centenaire, L’Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel.

1935: “and the Word was divine.” The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed.

1946: “and of a divine kind was the Word.” Das Neue Testament, by Ludwig Thimme.

1950: “and the Word was a god.” New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures.

1958: “and the Word was a God.” The New Testament, by James L. Tomanek.

1975: “and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word.” Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz.

1978: “and godlike kind was the Logos.” Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider.

At John 1:1 there are two occurrences of the Greek noun the·os′ (god). The first occurrence refers to Almighty God, with whom the Word was (“and the Word [lo′gos] was with God [a form of the·os′]”). This first the·os′ is preceded by the word ton (the), a form of the Greek definite article that points to a distinct identity, in this case Almighty God (“and the Word was with [the] God”).

On the other hand, there is no article before the second the·os′ at John 1:1. So a literal translation would read, “and god was the Word.” Yet we have seen that many translations render this second the·os′ (a predicate noun) as “divine,” “godlike,” or “a god.” On what authority do they do this?

The Koine Greek language had a definite article (“the”), but it did not have an indefinite article (“a” or “an”). So when a predicate noun is not preceded by the definite article, it may be indefinite, depending on the context.

The Journal of Biblical Literature says that expressions “with an anarthrous [no article] predicate preceding the verb, are primarily qualitative in meaning.” As the Journal notes, this indicates that the lo′gos can be likened to a god. It also says of John 1:1: “The qualitative force of the predicate is so prominent that the noun [the·os′] cannot be regarded as definite.”

So John 1:1 highlights the quality of the Word, that he was “divine,” “godlike,” “a god,” but not Almighty God. This harmonizes with the rest of the Bible, which shows that Jesus, here called “the Word” in his role as God’s Spokesman, was an obedient subordinate sent to earth by his Superior, Almighty God.

There are many other Bible verses in which almost all translators in other languages consistently insert the article “a” when translating Greek sentences with the same structure. For example, at Mark 6:49, when the disciples saw Jesus walking on water, the King James Version says: “They supposed it had been a spirit.” In the Koine Greek, there is no “a” before “spirit.” But almost all translations in other languages add an “a” in order to make the rendering fit the context. In the same way, since John 1:1 shows that the Word was with God, he could not be God but was “a god,” or “divine.”

Joseph Henry Thayer, a theologian and scholar who worked on the American Standard Version, stated simply: “The Logos was divine, not the divine Being himself.” And Jesuit John L. McKenzie wrote in his Dictionary of the Bible: “Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated . . . ‘the word was a divine being.’”

The question is....Was the Word God?
I put the extra material out there to reason.

The key verse is John 1:18 No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son,[a] who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.
New King James.

Jesus was the master at giving good illustrations. Why didn't he illustrate the trinity?

Answer 1

In the beginning was the Word =1 person
The Word was with God=2 persons

The Word was God or The Word was a God?

The 2nd statement shows that the Word is a different person from God so it makes sense that the Word is not God...but who is? Of course Jesus Christ, the fulfillment of God's word/promise...whom the bible refers to as a Mighty God but not the Almighty God.

John 17:3, Jesus makes a clear distinction between himself and his heavenly Father. He calls his Father “the only true God.” And toward the end of his Gospel, John sums up matters by saying: “These have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God.” (John 20:31) Notice that Jesus is called, not God, but the Son of God. This additional information provided in the Gospel of John shows how John 1:1 should be understood. Jesus, the Word, is “a god” in the sense that he has a high position but is not the same as Almighty God.

Answer 2

are you saying that John was or wasnt supporting a tri-god?
and if he was, why are only 2 persons mentioned in John 1:1?
doesnt trinity mean 3?

I have read the Bible thoroughly and see no support for any co-equal tri-god

In fact, Jesus *always* illustrates his subjection to his God; the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob whos name is Jehovah
Acts 3:13 and 1 Cor 15:24-28 show that he also taught his apostles about his subjection to Jehovah.
They are not equal according to the Bible.
But I believe the tri-god idea dates as far back as Babel and Nimrod and was probably one of those pagan things that the Roman government forced on the early Christians when they took over the religion in 325 a.d.

do a net search like I did and you'll find out the historic truth of these un-Scriptural teachings

agape!

Answer 3

Wrong, you are changing the words. Read it as written, as a sentence. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

" the Word was God. "

John 1:1 In the beginning (how old is this world/earth? Billions!) was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

You may want to do a study on the "Trinity"
Also a study on the world age prior to this flesh one that we were born again through the womb of woman into a flesh body. The earth surely is not only 5000 yrs. old.
hope this helps.
My Gram used to say, sometimes when you dig TOO deep you end up in China.
Gods Word is simple, written to the ear that hears in such a simplicity even a child can understand.
I see a lot of babble, confusion, in your question (?)
Many Scholars are full of good knowledge but not always in agreement nor accurate.
Said in love ~ you are truly doing your homework! ;-)

Answer 4

It depends on the kind of word describe to God. Some are writing words against God which I hate and some are writing words to love Him which I like very much.

Answer 5

Jason you forgot to say that the vatican manuscript the word "god" was written the first time capitilized and the second time no capitalized try to make a scan of the grrek manuscript of the bible ant put in the internet so they can see the word "god" two times written different it is very beatiful to see how easy as soon as they see it they will understand.

Answer 6

A word is an expression of a thought, idea or principle. The Word is divine principle, God. The Word then is God. Jesus is the second person of the mystical Trinity. Therefore, the Word was with God. Jesus the Word is God expressed perfectly as man. He is God's ultimate expression of principle full and complete, man. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, as recorded in the Gospels.

Answer 7

Jesus and God are two separate individuals. Jesus was with God at the beginning and was a divine spirit being similar to God.
No more needs to be said.

Trinity? You mean the Babylonian thing???

Answer 8

A-1 presentation, Jason. Also, " I and the Father are one", doesn't mean they're the same ( one in kind), because he said the same of his followers being at one with him and with each other. He spoke of them as many parts of the body, none being any more important or unnecessary than the next.
So, opposing logic would have it that if they are one with the Christ, and he is one with his father, then they are all equal - let's all be Buddhists!

Answer 9

Good research.

But, it all says the same. God is omnipresent. The Word (Jesus) was with God and WAS God, from the beginning, and before that.

Think of the Trinity this way:

You have three glasses with water in them, BUT, one is in liquid form (water), one glass in solid form (ice), and one in a gas form (steam).

It's still water. It's still H20. But, it takes on different forms.

Another way of looking at the Trinity.

You are a man.
But, to some, you are a friend.
To your children, you are a father.
To your wife, you are a husband.
To your parents, you are a son.

You are the same person, but you provide different roles.

That's the best I can explain the Trinity.

Answer 10

o dear I see you went for several extream and unknown vertions of the bible. I thought when you put lo'gos you had it.
in the begining was the knowladge the knowladge was with God and was God and yes I believe that means Jesus even that is not a perfect translation. but it is almost imposinle to get the exact meaning in translatting. I do believe that the bible is becoming closer and closer to its original meaning.