“In
the beginning was the Word, and
the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John
1:1)
John
1:1 is a cornerstone of Christian theology, as it
introduces the concept of the
“Word” (Greek: Logos) as a divine entity that
coexisted with God from
the very beginning. Breaking it down grammatically and
biblically, one finds:
1.“In
the
beginning” - This phrase echoes the opening of
Genesis, suggesting a cosmic,
timeless context. It implies that the Word existed
before the creation of the
world.
2.“Was”
- The
verb “was” (Greek: ἦν, eimi) is in the
imperfect tense, indicating
continuous existence. It emphasizes the eternal nature
of the Word.
3."The
Word"-
The Greek term “Logos” (λόγος) is rich in
meaning. It can
refer to the spoken word, reason, or an underlying
principle or logic. John's
Gospel refers to the preexistent Christ, who embodies
God's wisdom and creative
power.
4.“With
God” -
The preposition “with” (Greek: πρός, pros)
suggests a close, intimate
relationship between the Word and God. It implies a
distinction of persons
within the Godhead, yet a unity of essence.
5.“And
the Word
was God”- This phrase affirms the Word's deity. The
absence of the definite
article before “God” (Greek: θεός, theos) is
grammatically significant.
It suggests that the Word shares the same divine
nature as God without implying
that the Word is a separate god.
Biblically,
this
verse establishes Jesus as the pre-existent, divine
Word who became flesh
and dwelt among us (John 1:14). It sets the stage for
the rest of the Gospel,
which proclaims Jesus as the incarnate Son of God, the
source of life and
light, and the Savior of the world.
The
Arian Heresy:
The
Arian heresy refers to a theological controversy that
arose in the early
Christian Church, named after its most prominent
proponent, Arius, a presbyter
from Alexandria in the early 4th century. At the heart
of the controversy was
the nature of the relationship between God the Father
and Jesus Christ.
Arius
taught that Jesus Christ, the Son, was not co-eternal
with God the Father. He
argued that the Son was created by the Father, and
therefore, there was a time
when the Son did not exist. In Arius' view, the Son
was a created being, divine
in nature but not equal to the Father.
This
view starkly contrasted with the traditional Christian
belief, which held that
the Son was co-eternal with the Father and fully
divine, a belief encapsulated
in the doctrine of the Trinity. The Arian heresy was
condemned as a heresy at
the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, where the
Council Fathers affirmed the
full divinity of the Son and formulated the Nicene
Creed, which states that the
Son is “of one substance with the Father.”
The
Arian controversy had significant implications for the
development of Christian
theology. It forced the Church to clarify and define
its understanding of the
Trinity and the nature of Christ, leading to the
formulation of doctrines that
are still central to Christian theology today.
A
modern-day example of Arianism:
The
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, commonly known as
the Jehovah's Witnesses,
interprets John 1:1 as “In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with
God, and the Word was a god.” This interpretation is
based on a particular
reading of the Greek text and has been a point of
significant theological
debate.
Biblical
scholars
have criticized this interpretation for several
reasons:
1.Greek
Grammar:
The Watchtower's translation hinges on the absence of
the definite article “the”
(Greek: ὁ, ho) before “God” (Greek: θεός, theos)
in the phrase “the Word
was God.” However, Greek grammar does not require the
definite article to
denote a definite noun. The absence of the article
here is more likely a
stylistic choice to emphasize the nature of the Word
rather than to diminish
its divinity.
2.Contextual
Analysis:
The Watchtower's interpretation ignores the broader
context of John's
Gospel, which consistently presents Jesus as divine.
For example, John 20:28,
where Thomas calls Jesus “My Lord and my God,” and
John 10:30, where Jesus
states, “I and the Father are one.”
3.Historical
Context:
The early Christian Church universally accepted
Christ's deity. The
Jehovah's Witnesses' interpretation is a relatively
recent development, first
appearing in their New World Translation of the Bible
in 1950.
4.Biblical
Theology:
The doctrine of the Trinity, which holds that the
Father, the Son
(Jesus), and the Holy Spirit are three distinct
persons in one divine essence,
is a central tenet of orthodox Christianity. The
Watchtower's interpretation
contradicts this doctrine by suggesting that Jesus is
a lesser deity, or “a
god,” rather than being fully divine.
In
conclusion, the Watchtower's interpretation of John
1:1 is not accepted among
biblical scholars and theologians. It is seen as a
misinterpretation that stems
from a particular theological perspective rather than
a careful reading of the
Greek text and its broader biblical context.
Additionally,
the
Granville Sharp Rule, named after the English
theologian and scholar
Granville Sharp, is a grammatical principle applied to
the translation of New
Testament Greek. It is used to determine the
relationship between two nouns in
a sentence when they are connected by the conjunction
“and” (Greek: καί, “kai”).
The rule states that when two singular common nouns
are used to describe a
person, and those two nouns are joined by the
conjunction “and,” and the
definite article (Greek: ὁ, “ho”)
precedes the first noun, but
not the second, then both nouns refer to the same
person.
This
rule is significant in New Testament studies,
particularly in discussions
regarding the deity of Christ. It has been applied to
several verses, notably
Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1, to argue that Jesus is
explicitly referred to as “God”
in these texts. For example, in Titus 2:13, the phrase
“the great God and our
Savior Jesus Christ” is translated from Greek as “τοῦ
μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ Σωτῆρος
ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.” According to the Granville
Sharp Rule, since “God” and
“Savior” are both preceded by the definite article
“the” (in the genitive
case), they refer to the same person, Jesus Christ,
who is thus identified as “God”
and “Savior.”
What
a number of Greek scholars think about The New World
Translation of John 1:1:
Dr.
J. R. Mantey (who is quoted on pages 1158-1159) of the
Jehovah's Witnesses own
Kingdom Interlinear Translation):
“A
shocking mistranslation.”
“Obsolete and incorrect.” “It is neither scholarly nor
reasonable to translate
John 1:1 'The Word was a god.'”
“But
of all the scholars in the
world, so far as we know, none have translated this
verse as Jehovah’s
Witnesses have done.”
“I
have never read any New Testament
so badly translated as the Kingdom Interlinear of the
Greek Scriptures…. It is
a distortion–not a translation.”
“The
translators of the New World
Translation are ‘diabolical deceivers.’”
Dr.
Bruce M. Metzger of Princeton (Professor of New
Testament Language and
Literature):
“A
frightful mistranslation.”
“Erroneous” and “pernicious” “reprehensible” “If the
Jehovah's Witnesses take
this translation seriously, they are polytheists.”
Dr.
Samuel J. Mikolaski of Zurich, Switzerland:
“This
anarthrous (used without the
article) construction does not mean what the
indefinite article 'a' means in
English. It is monstrous to translate the phrase 'the
Word was a god.'”
Dr.
Paul L. Kaufman of Portland, Oregon:
“The
Jehovah's Witnesses people
evidence an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets of
Greek grammar in their
mistranslation of John 1:1.”
Dr.
Charles L. Feinberg of La Mirada, California:
“I
can assure you that the rendering
which the Jehovah's Witnesses give John 1:1 is not
held by any reputable Greek
scholar.”
Dr.
James L. Boyer of Winona Lake, Indiana:
“I
have never heard of, or read of any Greek Scholar who
would have agreed to the
interpretation of this verse insisted upon by the
Jehovah's Witnesses...I have
never encountered one of them who had any knowledge of
the Greek language.”
Dr.
William Barclay of the University of Glasgow,
Scotland:
“The
deliberate distortion of truth
by this sect is seen in their New Testament
translations. John 1:1 is
translated: '...the Word was a god,' a translation
which is grammatically
impossible...It is abundantly clear that a sect which
can translate the New
Testament like that is intellectually dishonest."
Dr.
F. F. Bruce of the University of Manchester, England:
“Much
is made by Arian amateur
grammarians of the omission of the definite article
with 'God' in the phrase
'And the Word was God.' Such an omission is common
with nouns in a predicative
construction...'a god' would be totally indefensible.”
Dr.
Ernest C. Colwell of the University of Chicago:
“A
definite predicate nominative has
the article when it follows the verb; it does not have
the article when it
precedes the verb...this statement cannot be regarded
as strange in the
prologue of the gospel which reaches its climax in the
confession of Thomas.
'My Lord and my God.' - John 20:28”
Dr.
Phillip B. Harner of Heidelberg College:
“The
verb preceding an anarthrous
predicate would probably mean that the LOGOS was 'a
god' or a divine being of
some kind, belonging to the general category of THEOS
but as a distinct being
from HO THEOS. In the form that John actually uses,
the word “THEOS” is placed
at the beginning for emphasis.”
Dr.
J. Johnson of California State University, Long Beach:
“No
justification whatsoever for
translating THEOS EN HO LOGOS as 'the Word was a god.'
There is no syntactical
parallel to Acts 28:6 where there is a statement in
indirect discourse; John
1:1 is direct....I am neither a Christian nor a
trinitarian.”
Dr.
Eugene A. Nida, head of the Translations Department,
American Bible Society:
“With
regard to John 1:1, there is
of course a complication simply because the New World
Translation was
apparently done by persons who did not take seriously
the syntax of the Greek.”
[Responsible for the Good News Bible - The committee
worked under him.]
Dr.
B. F. Wescott (whose Greek text - not the English part
- is used in the Kingdom
Interlinear Translation):
“The
predicate (God) stands
emphatically first, as in IV.24. It is necessarily
without the article...No
idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form
of expression, which
simply affirms the true deity of the Word...in the
third clause 'the Word' is
declared to be 'God' and so included in the unity of
the Godhead.”
The
above study was Groked and perfected with Grammarly
AI.
“Study
to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that
needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word
of truth.” (2 Timothy
2:15)
Mr.
Kettler, a respected author and theologian, has
previously published articles in the Chalcedon
Report and Contra
Mundum. He and his wife, Marea, are active
members of the Westminster, CO,
RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler's extensive work includes 18
books defending the
Reformed Faith, which are available for order online
at Amazon.