John,
I have
expressed my appreciation for your classes on more than one occasion, and I
want to begin by reiterating that appreciation. I have benefited from them and
value the opportunity to participate in the discussions.
Unfortunately,
perhaps either because my comment was inartfully phrased or I may have
misunderstood your response, I left class concerned that our discussion may
have given those in attendance the impression that Charles Taze Russell’s
translation of John 1:1c, as reflected in the New World Translation, is
correct; namely, “the Word was a god.”
The
specific issue I intended to raise concerned the Greek construction kai ho
logos eimi theos.
Although I
am not sufficiently knowledgeable in either Koine or modern Greek to claim
certainty regarding all the grammatical issues involved, I do have some
familiarity with the use of articles. I understood you to say that Greek does
not have definite articles. I suspect, however, that you may have meant that
the noun theos is anarthrous in John 1:1c (viz., that it appears
without the antecedent definite article).
If so, I
do not believe it was clearly established during the discussion that the
absence of the article before θεός cannot, by itself, legitimately
support translating the verse, “the Word was a god.” My understanding is that
John 1:1 simultaneously expresses both distinction and deity: “the Word was
with God, and the Word was God.”
The Greek
construction more naturally communicates something along these lines: The
Word was distinct from the God with whom He existed, yet the Word was Himself
fully and truly theos, possessing the divine nature.
I realize,
of course, that class time is limited, and I readily acknowledge the
possibility that I misunderstood either your statement or the context in which
it was made. If the session was recorded, perhaps reviewing that portion of the
discussion would help determine whether there was a misunderstanding.
Because of
the technical nature of this subject and because I did not want to create
unnecessary confusion or prolong the discussion during class, I thought it
would be better to raise the matter with you in this manner. If you would care
to discuss it further, I would be very happy to do so.
SDG,
Tom Rhudy
No comments:
Post a Comment