Q: In Jn 1:1, what are some other examples of how Jehovah’s Witnesses corrupt their scripture?
A: Here are a few examples.
John 1:1 Added "a" in the Word was a god.
Luke 23:43 "Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in Paradise." (This made it appear like Jesus was speaking today, rather than the Greek meaning of the repentant thief being in Paradise today.)
Acts 10:36 added the word "other" putting it in square brackets.
Rom 8:32 Added "other" with no italics or brackets.
Colossians 1:16-20 added the word "other" four times.
Philippians 2:9 added the word "other" with no italics or brackets.
Q: In Jn 1:1, what did the early church teach about this verse and the Word being God?
A: It is sometimes interesting to hear what modern scholars, 2000 years later, say the Greek meant. However, what is more interesting what church leaders who lived 1700-1800 years ago, many of whom spoke New Testament Greek since they were babies, interpreted what John 1:1, in their own language, meant to them.
Justin Martyr (c.138-165 A.D.)
"for when we give out some word, we beget the word; yet not by abscission, so as to lessen the word [which remains] in us, when we give it out; and just as we see also happening in the case of a fire, which is not lessened when it has kindled [another], but remains the same;... The Word of Wisdom, who is Himself this God begotten of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter, will bear evidence to me..." Dialogue with Trypho ch.61. See also chapters 55,56,59,62-64,66,74-78.
Theophilus bishop of Antioch (168-181/188 A.D.) "For the divine writing itself teaches us that Adam said that he had heard the voice. But what else is this voice but the Word of God, who is also His Son?" Letter to Autolycus book 2 ch.22 p.103
Irenaeus of Lyons (182-188 A.D.)
"But that He [Jesus] is Himself in His own right, beyond all men who ever lived, God, and Lord, and King Eternal, and the Incarnate Word, proclaimed by all the prophets, the apostles, and by the Spirit Himself, may be seen by all who have obtained to even a small portion of the truth." (Irenaeus Against Heresies book 3 ch.19.2 p.449).
"Know thou that every man is either empty or full. For if he has not the Holy Spirit, he has no knowledge of the Creator; he has not received Jesus Christ the life; he knows not the Father who is in heaven;..." (Irenaeus fragment 26 p.572)
"She [the church] also believes these points [of doctrine] just as if she had but one soul.... For the churches which have been planted in Germany do not believe or hand down anything different nor do those in Spain nor those in Gaul, nor those in the East nor those in Egypt nor those in Libya, nor ..." Irenaeus Against Heresies book 1 ch.10.2 p.331
Tertullian (c.213 A.D.) (Latin) "The Word, therefore, is both always in the Father, as He says, ‘I am in the Father;’ and is always with God, according to what is written, ‘And the Word was with God;’ and never separate from the Father, or other than the Father, since ‘I and the Father are one.’" Against Praxeas chapter 8 p.603.
Hippolytus (225-235/6 A.D.) after quoting part of John 1:1 "If, then the Word was with God and was also God what follows? Would one say that he speaks of two Gods? I shall not indeed speak of two Gods but of one; of two Persons however and of a third economy (disposition), viz., the grace of the Holy Ghost. For the Father indeed is One but there are two Persons because there is also the Son; and then there is the third the Holy Spirit. The Father decrees, the Word executes and the Son is manifested, through whom the Father is believed on. The economy of the harmony is led back to one God; for God is One. It is the Father who commands and the Son who obeys and the Holy Spirit who gives understanding; the Father is above all, and the Son who is through all and the Holy Spirit who is in all. And we cannot otherwise think of one God, but by believing in truth in Father and Son and Holy Spirit." Against the Heresy of One Noetus chapter 14 p.228
Q: In Jn 1:1, is it true that the doctrine that Jesus was God in human form was not finalized until after 300 A.D.?
A: No. Karen Armstrong categorically stated this in A History of God p.81, and it is amazing what some printed books can get away with saying. There are no Orthodox Christians or Arians who said Jesus was not God, though Arians said Jesus was a different substance, and God in a different and lesser way. Prior to 300 A.D. the five early church writers quoted in the previous question certainly did not think the doctrine of Jesus being God in human form needed any finalizing. Ignatius, who was a disciple of John the apostle, was fond of saying that "Jesus is God". Thomas the apostle did not need any council when he said to Jesus in John 20:28, "My Lord and My God!"
While it is true that Gnostics were heretics who had very strange views of God, they were never accepted as Christians by Orthodox Christians. Regardless, even they accepted Jesus was God, though in a very different and strange sense.
Arians were another heretical group that was condemned at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D..
They had a "low" opinion of Jesus, believing there was a time when He was not, and that Jesus was of a different substance than the Father. However, even they agreed that Jesus was God; it was that they wrongly believed Jesus was not of the same nature as the Father.
I suppose a shortcoming of creeds is that some can misinterpret what they are for. The Nicene Controversy over Arianism was not whether or not Jesus was God, but over how Jesus was God.
Q: In Jn 1:1, how could the Word both be God and with God?
A: In the same way as the Son could be both God and have a God in Hebrews 1:8,9. Besides referring to false gods, the word "God" has at least four meanings with respect to the true God. "God" can mean just the Father, just the Son, just the Spirit, or the three in Trinity.
Here is what the early church writer Hippolytus (225-235/6 A.D.) said in Against the Heresy of One Noetus ch.14 p.228 "If, then the Word was with God and was also God what follows? I shall not indeed speak of two Gods but of one; of two Persons however and of a third economy (disposition), viz., the grace of the Holy Ghost. For the Father indeed is One but there are two Persons because there is also the son; and then there is the third the Holy Spirit."
Q: In Jn 1:1, how could God be incarnated as a man?
A: On one hand the answer is simple:
God Almighty can appear however He wishes. On the other hand, this is a profound miracle. Melito of Sardis (170-180 A.D.) pondered the mystery of the incarnation in his Discourse on the Cross (vol.8) p.756 "On these accounts He came to us; on these accounts, though He was incorporeal, He formed for Himself a body after our fashion, appearing as a sheep, yet still remaining the Shepherd; being esteemed a servant, yet not renouncing the Sonship; being carried [in the womb] of Mary, yet arrayed in [the nature of] His Father; treading upon the earth, yet filling heaven; appearing as an infant, yet not discarding the eternity of His nature; being invested with a body, yet not circumscribing the unmixed simplicity of His Godhead; being esteemed poor, yet not divested of His riches; needing sustenance inasmuch as He was man, yet not ceasing to feed the entire world inasmuch as He is God; putting on the likeness of a servant, yet not impairing the likeness of His Father."
Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew chapter 61 p.227 gave the analogy of how fire is kindled from fire. The original fire is not lessened in any way.
(Note that early church quotes in this Web Sites are all from the Ante-Nicene Fathers and Post-Nicene Fathers I and II.)
Q: In Jn 1:1 I have been struggling understanding the theanthropic nature of Christ. Was Jesus mentally fully mature, knowing all things even as an infant? Even though he became a man did he still have the infinite mind of God, Luke 2:52 says "Jesus grew in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man" If Jesus did not change who He was when he came into flesh than why did he grow in knowledge, wisdom, and favor with God, when he was already the infinite God?
A: Many things about God can be more easily understand by comparison with an analogy of nature. However, the mystery of the incarnation has no analogy with anything in nature.
While we cannot know everything about the incarnation, we can learn what scripture has revealed about it. So, to summarize, there are five key points to know.
1. Jesus is 100% God. He was 100% God before He was born, on earth, and now in heaven. (John 1:1; 20:28; Colossians 1:5-20; 1:6,8,9)
(Of course heaven was not empty when Jesus came to earth. However, I don't include this as a point, as this the inseparableness of God, along with the distinctness of the Father, Son, and Spirit are points of the Trinity, not the Incarnation.)
2. Jesus was 100% man from the time he was in the womb onwards. He was like us in every way, except without sin. (Hebrews 2:14-18; 4:15; 5:1-2)
3. Jesus was just one person. (There were not two distinct beings, a God-Jesus and a man-Jesus) like extreme Nestorianism leans towards.)
4. Jesus had two distinct natures. (There humanity of Jesus was not subsumed by the divinity of Jesus. When it says Jesus suffered, He really suffered. When it says Jesus was tempted, He was really tempted. These things are denied by the more extreme parts of the error of Monophysitism.)
But if you get these four things, there is still one thing missing, which you have to see to fit these together.
5. Most of Jesus' glory was veiled. Jesus voluntarily emptied Himself of many of His divine attributes according to Philippians 2:6-7. That is why Jesus specifically prayed to the Father to restore to Him the glory Jesus had before the world began in John 17:5. So, to answer the first part of your question, on earth Jesus grew in wisdom, stature or height, and in favor, not only being the perfect infant, but then the perfect little boy, perfect bigger boy, and then perfect man. Jesus learned obedience, suffered, and died, which He could only have done if part of His power were voluntarily and temporarily relinquished.
Q: In Jn 1:1, how else do we know that Jesus is God?
A: 1001 Bible Questions Answered p.27 says this is proven by seven points.
1. All Old Testament names for God are merged into Jesus Christ.
2. Jesus received human worship. Either He was wrong to do so, or else He was correct to do so.
3. Jesus forgave sins against God.
4. Jesus showed God’s power.
5. Jesus showed omniscience (perhaps he did not have this on earth prior to his resurrection though.)
6. Jesus asserted omnipresence.
7. The New Testament says that Jesus is God, and is to be honored as the Father.
See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.490-492 for more on John 1:1 and the Trinity.
Q: In Jn 1:1, was this concept of an eternal word borrowed from Greek philosophy?
A: No, there is no evidence for this.
The Greek philosopher Plato did write of an eternal word logos prior to John’s Gospel, and Heraclitus of Ephesus (ca.500 B.C.) used logos to represent rational principle. Philo the Jew also used the term logos. However, there is no evidence that John borrowed from this.
Rather than John borrowing from Greek philosophy, even a secular person could make a case that the concept of a powerful and living Word was borrowed from Old Testament thought, such as Genesis 1:1 in Hebrew.
The Old Testament was not borrowed from Greek thought, as Moses and the Israelites preceded all written Greek literature we are aware of. Theophilus of Antioch, written (168-181/188 A.D.), was the first to point this out in his Letter to Autolycus book 3 ch.30 p.121
The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.441 says that the Dead Sea scrolls indicate that the Gospel of John, rather than being a second century Hellenistic document, "is shown more clearly than ever to be a product of First Century Palestine by virtue of its many parallels with the Qumran texts."
Q: In Jn 1:1, was there a time before Jesus existed?
A: No. Arian heretics thought this, but Orthodox Christians more or less unanimously said that Jesus was begotten of the Father before time began. One exception to this was the early church writer Justin Martyr (c.138-165 A.D.) However, even though Jehovah’s Witnesses appeal to Justin Martyr to try to support their beliefs, their appeal is deceptive. In his Dialogue with Trypho, Justin devotes thirteen chapters (55-56,59,61-64,66,74-78) to prove that Jesus is God.
The Bible does not conclusively answer many questions about what it was like before time began. Even if it did, would we understand the answers? Titus 1:2 says that God promised eternal life "before the beginning of time". All things were created through Christ (Colossians 1:16; John 1:3). If all things include time (an assumption here), then Jesus existed before there was time.
See 1001 Bible Questions Answered p.27-28 for more on their not being a time before Jesus existed.
Q: In Jn 1:1 did Jesus merely preexist only in God’s foreknowledge, as the Way International teaches?
A: No. We all were foreknown by God, but Jesus was different than us in that He pre-existed in Heaven from before time began. See When Cultists Ask p.161 for more info.
Q: In Jn 1:1, since the Word (Logos) is God, does this mean that God is impersonal, as Mary Baker Eddy, founder of the Christian Science cult taught in Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures p.117?
A: No. Just because God has some characteristics we do not have (infinite, invisible, three-in-oneness, etc.) does not exclude God from also having some characteristics that we also have, though often in a lesser degree (ability to love, intelligence, will, emotions, etc.). So just because the Word is God, does not mean we have to deny the many Bible verses that show God has personality.
So, what Bible verses show that God has personality? Personality includes mind, will, and emotions. While a computer can store knowledge without personality, a computer does not have love, wrath, and other emotions, and a computer does not have a will.
When we cry "Abba", or "Daddy" in Galatians 4:6; Mark 14:36; and Romans 8:15, praise God we are crying out to a personal being.
See When Cultists Ask p.160-161 for more info.
Q: In Jn 1:2, if all things were created by the Word, does that include time, space, science, natural laws, and mathematics?
A: Probably so, though this verse was not written to prove that. However, a logical truth, like a = a, and a logical contradiction, such as a not equal a, are not things, and this verse is not talking about those.
Q: Should Jn 1:3 (KJV), be translated "by Him" or "through Him?
A: One can legitimately translate the Greek either way.
by is the translation of the KJV, the NET Bible, William F. Beck’s translation, and earlier editions of the NASB.
through is the translation of NASB (1973 edition), uNASB, NIV, NKJV, NRSV, RSV, George Ricker Berry’s Translation, and Jay P. Green’s Literal Translation, Williams Translation, and the Believer’s Bible Commentary.
Wuest’s Expanded Translation uses as many words as necessary to bring out the Greek text. He translates it "through His intermediate agency".
This is a moot point, because nobody says Jesus made everything apart from the Father. All Christians understand that Jesus had a role, along with the Father and Spirit, in creating everything, as Colossians 1:16 also shows. See also the next question for more info.
Q: In Jn 1:3, should it be "by" (KJV), or have the RSV, NIV, and NKJV provided relief by craftily removing the word "by" and replacing it with the word "through", as one KJV-only person alleges?
A: There are six things to consider before making this charge.
1. The Greek word in question here is di, a form of dia. Strong’s Concordance says, "a prim[itive]. Prep[osition]. Denoting the channel of an act; through (in very wide applications, local, causal, or occasional): -after, always, among, at, to avoid, because of (that), briefly, by, for (cause) for sake, that, thereby, therefore, X though, through (-out), to, wherefore, with (-in). In composition it retains the same general import." Thus "by" and "through" are both legitimate translations.
2. The King James Version itself translates these two letters (di), as "through" in Matthew 12:43 and Luke 11:24. In John 3:17 "that the world might be saved through him", the Greek word for "through" is "di".
3. The translators of NASB, NIV, NRSV, and Williams translation probably did not assume Jesus spoke King James English. They translated from the Greek, and "through" is an acceptable translation of the Greek di according to both Strong’s Concordance and the King James Version itself.
4. One could try to argue that "by" meant that Jesus was the sole cause of Creation, and the word "by" neglects the role of the Father and Spirit. One could also try to argue that "through" meant that Jesus had a secondary role. The truth of the matter is that the Greek word di, along with the English words "by" and "through" have a wide range of meaning.
5. The King James Version translators did a good job translating the Bible into the English of their time, using the materials they had. However, if in some other passage Jesus’ words in Greek (in all manuscripts) differed from the King James Version, would you exalt this English Translation above Jesus’ word in Greek?
6. Before you accuse fellow Christians of craftily removing a word and inserting another, you should provide some evidence of this accusation, without simply assuming Jesus spoke King James English.
Q: In Jn 1:1, how could the Word both be God and with God?
A: Here are a few examples.
John 1:1 Added "a" in the Word was a god.
Luke 23:43 "Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in Paradise." (This made it appear like Jesus was speaking today, rather than the Greek meaning of the repentant thief being in Paradise today.)
Acts 10:36 added the word "other" putting it in square brackets.
Rom 8:32 Added "other" with no italics or brackets.
Colossians 1:16-20 added the word "other" four times.
Philippians 2:9 added the word "other" with no italics or brackets.
Q: In Jn 1:1, what did the early church teach about this verse and the Word being God?
A: It is sometimes interesting to hear what modern scholars, 2000 years later, say the Greek meant. However, what is more interesting what church leaders who lived 1700-1800 years ago, many of whom spoke New Testament Greek since they were babies, interpreted what John 1:1, in their own language, meant to them.
Justin Martyr (c.138-165 A.D.)
"for when we give out some word, we beget the word; yet not by abscission, so as to lessen the word [which remains] in us, when we give it out; and just as we see also happening in the case of a fire, which is not lessened when it has kindled [another], but remains the same;... The Word of Wisdom, who is Himself this God begotten of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter, will bear evidence to me..." Dialogue with Trypho ch.61. See also chapters 55,56,59,62-64,66,74-78.
Theophilus bishop of Antioch (168-181/188 A.D.) "For the divine writing itself teaches us that Adam said that he had heard the voice. But what else is this voice but the Word of God, who is also His Son?" Letter to Autolycus book 2 ch.22 p.103
Irenaeus of Lyons (182-188 A.D.)
"But that He [Jesus] is Himself in His own right, beyond all men who ever lived, God, and Lord, and King Eternal, and the Incarnate Word, proclaimed by all the prophets, the apostles, and by the Spirit Himself, may be seen by all who have obtained to even a small portion of the truth." (Irenaeus Against Heresies book 3 ch.19.2 p.449).
"Know thou that every man is either empty or full. For if he has not the Holy Spirit, he has no knowledge of the Creator; he has not received Jesus Christ the life; he knows not the Father who is in heaven;..." (Irenaeus fragment 26 p.572)
"She [the church] also believes these points [of doctrine] just as if she had but one soul.... For the churches which have been planted in Germany do not believe or hand down anything different nor do those in Spain nor those in Gaul, nor those in the East nor those in Egypt nor those in Libya, nor ..." Irenaeus Against Heresies book 1 ch.10.2 p.331
Tertullian (c.213 A.D.) (Latin) "The Word, therefore, is both always in the Father, as He says, ‘I am in the Father;’ and is always with God, according to what is written, ‘And the Word was with God;’ and never separate from the Father, or other than the Father, since ‘I and the Father are one.’" Against Praxeas chapter 8 p.603.
Hippolytus (225-235/6 A.D.) after quoting part of John 1:1 "If, then the Word was with God and was also God what follows? Would one say that he speaks of two Gods? I shall not indeed speak of two Gods but of one; of two Persons however and of a third economy (disposition), viz., the grace of the Holy Ghost. For the Father indeed is One but there are two Persons because there is also the Son; and then there is the third the Holy Spirit. The Father decrees, the Word executes and the Son is manifested, through whom the Father is believed on. The economy of the harmony is led back to one God; for God is One. It is the Father who commands and the Son who obeys and the Holy Spirit who gives understanding; the Father is above all, and the Son who is through all and the Holy Spirit who is in all. And we cannot otherwise think of one God, but by believing in truth in Father and Son and Holy Spirit." Against the Heresy of One Noetus chapter 14 p.228
Q: In Jn 1:1, is it true that the doctrine that Jesus was God in human form was not finalized until after 300 A.D.?
A: No. Karen Armstrong categorically stated this in A History of God p.81, and it is amazing what some printed books can get away with saying. There are no Orthodox Christians or Arians who said Jesus was not God, though Arians said Jesus was a different substance, and God in a different and lesser way. Prior to 300 A.D. the five early church writers quoted in the previous question certainly did not think the doctrine of Jesus being God in human form needed any finalizing. Ignatius, who was a disciple of John the apostle, was fond of saying that "Jesus is God". Thomas the apostle did not need any council when he said to Jesus in John 20:28, "My Lord and My God!"
While it is true that Gnostics were heretics who had very strange views of God, they were never accepted as Christians by Orthodox Christians. Regardless, even they accepted Jesus was God, though in a very different and strange sense.
Arians were another heretical group that was condemned at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D..
They had a "low" opinion of Jesus, believing there was a time when He was not, and that Jesus was of a different substance than the Father. However, even they agreed that Jesus was God; it was that they wrongly believed Jesus was not of the same nature as the Father.
I suppose a shortcoming of creeds is that some can misinterpret what they are for. The Nicene Controversy over Arianism was not whether or not Jesus was God, but over how Jesus was God.
Q: In Jn 1:1, how could the Word both be God and with God?
A: In the same way as the Son could be both God and have a God in Hebrews 1:8,9. Besides referring to false gods, the word "God" has at least four meanings with respect to the true God. "God" can mean just the Father, just the Son, just the Spirit, or the three in Trinity.
Here is what the early church writer Hippolytus (225-235/6 A.D.) said in Against the Heresy of One Noetus ch.14 p.228 "If, then the Word was with God and was also God what follows? I shall not indeed speak of two Gods but of one; of two Persons however and of a third economy (disposition), viz., the grace of the Holy Ghost. For the Father indeed is One but there are two Persons because there is also the son; and then there is the third the Holy Spirit."
Q: In Jn 1:1, how could God be incarnated as a man?
A: On one hand the answer is simple:
God Almighty can appear however He wishes. On the other hand, this is a profound miracle. Melito of Sardis (170-180 A.D.) pondered the mystery of the incarnation in his Discourse on the Cross (vol.8) p.756 "On these accounts He came to us; on these accounts, though He was incorporeal, He formed for Himself a body after our fashion, appearing as a sheep, yet still remaining the Shepherd; being esteemed a servant, yet not renouncing the Sonship; being carried [in the womb] of Mary, yet arrayed in [the nature of] His Father; treading upon the earth, yet filling heaven; appearing as an infant, yet not discarding the eternity of His nature; being invested with a body, yet not circumscribing the unmixed simplicity of His Godhead; being esteemed poor, yet not divested of His riches; needing sustenance inasmuch as He was man, yet not ceasing to feed the entire world inasmuch as He is God; putting on the likeness of a servant, yet not impairing the likeness of His Father."
Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew chapter 61 p.227 gave the analogy of how fire is kindled from fire. The original fire is not lessened in any way.
(Note that early church quotes in this Web Sites are all from the Ante-Nicene Fathers and Post-Nicene Fathers I and II.)
Q: In Jn 1:1 I have been struggling understanding the theanthropic nature of Christ. Was Jesus mentally fully mature, knowing all things even as an infant? Even though he became a man did he still have the infinite mind of God, Luke 2:52 says "Jesus grew in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man" If Jesus did not change who He was when he came into flesh than why did he grow in knowledge, wisdom, and favor with God, when he was already the infinite God?
A: Many things about God can be more easily understand by comparison with an analogy of nature. However, the mystery of the incarnation has no analogy with anything in nature.
While we cannot know everything about the incarnation, we can learn what scripture has revealed about it. So, to summarize, there are five key points to know.
1. Jesus is 100% God. He was 100% God before He was born, on earth, and now in heaven. (John 1:1; 20:28; Colossians 1:5-20; 1:6,8,9)
(Of course heaven was not empty when Jesus came to earth. However, I don't include this as a point, as this the inseparableness of God, along with the distinctness of the Father, Son, and Spirit are points of the Trinity, not the Incarnation.)
2. Jesus was 100% man from the time he was in the womb onwards. He was like us in every way, except without sin. (Hebrews 2:14-18; 4:15; 5:1-2)
3. Jesus was just one person. (There were not two distinct beings, a God-Jesus and a man-Jesus) like extreme Nestorianism leans towards.)
4. Jesus had two distinct natures. (There humanity of Jesus was not subsumed by the divinity of Jesus. When it says Jesus suffered, He really suffered. When it says Jesus was tempted, He was really tempted. These things are denied by the more extreme parts of the error of Monophysitism.)
But if you get these four things, there is still one thing missing, which you have to see to fit these together.
5. Most of Jesus' glory was veiled. Jesus voluntarily emptied Himself of many of His divine attributes according to Philippians 2:6-7. That is why Jesus specifically prayed to the Father to restore to Him the glory Jesus had before the world began in John 17:5. So, to answer the first part of your question, on earth Jesus grew in wisdom, stature or height, and in favor, not only being the perfect infant, but then the perfect little boy, perfect bigger boy, and then perfect man. Jesus learned obedience, suffered, and died, which He could only have done if part of His power were voluntarily and temporarily relinquished.
Q: In Jn 1:1, how else do we know that Jesus is God?
A: 1001 Bible Questions Answered p.27 says this is proven by seven points.
1. All Old Testament names for God are merged into Jesus Christ.
2. Jesus received human worship. Either He was wrong to do so, or else He was correct to do so.
3. Jesus forgave sins against God.
4. Jesus showed God’s power.
5. Jesus showed omniscience (perhaps he did not have this on earth prior to his resurrection though.)
6. Jesus asserted omnipresence.
7. The New Testament says that Jesus is God, and is to be honored as the Father.
See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.490-492 for more on John 1:1 and the Trinity.
Q: In Jn 1:1, was this concept of an eternal word borrowed from Greek philosophy?
A: No, there is no evidence for this.
The Greek philosopher Plato did write of an eternal word logos prior to John’s Gospel, and Heraclitus of Ephesus (ca.500 B.C.) used logos to represent rational principle. Philo the Jew also used the term logos. However, there is no evidence that John borrowed from this.
Rather than John borrowing from Greek philosophy, even a secular person could make a case that the concept of a powerful and living Word was borrowed from Old Testament thought, such as Genesis 1:1 in Hebrew.
The Old Testament was not borrowed from Greek thought, as Moses and the Israelites preceded all written Greek literature we are aware of. Theophilus of Antioch, written (168-181/188 A.D.), was the first to point this out in his Letter to Autolycus book 3 ch.30 p.121
The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.441 says that the Dead Sea scrolls indicate that the Gospel of John, rather than being a second century Hellenistic document, "is shown more clearly than ever to be a product of First Century Palestine by virtue of its many parallels with the Qumran texts."
Q: In Jn 1:1, was there a time before Jesus existed?
A: No. Arian heretics thought this, but Orthodox Christians more or less unanimously said that Jesus was begotten of the Father before time began. One exception to this was the early church writer Justin Martyr (c.138-165 A.D.) However, even though Jehovah’s Witnesses appeal to Justin Martyr to try to support their beliefs, their appeal is deceptive. In his Dialogue with Trypho, Justin devotes thirteen chapters (55-56,59,61-64,66,74-78) to prove that Jesus is God.
The Bible does not conclusively answer many questions about what it was like before time began. Even if it did, would we understand the answers? Titus 1:2 says that God promised eternal life "before the beginning of time". All things were created through Christ (Colossians 1:16; John 1:3). If all things include time (an assumption here), then Jesus existed before there was time.
See 1001 Bible Questions Answered p.27-28 for more on their not being a time before Jesus existed.
Q: In Jn 1:1 did Jesus merely preexist only in God’s foreknowledge, as the Way International teaches?
A: No. We all were foreknown by God, but Jesus was different than us in that He pre-existed in Heaven from before time began. See When Cultists Ask p.161 for more info.
Q: In Jn 1:1, since the Word (Logos) is God, does this mean that God is impersonal, as Mary Baker Eddy, founder of the Christian Science cult taught in Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures p.117?
A: No. Just because God has some characteristics we do not have (infinite, invisible, three-in-oneness, etc.) does not exclude God from also having some characteristics that we also have, though often in a lesser degree (ability to love, intelligence, will, emotions, etc.). So just because the Word is God, does not mean we have to deny the many Bible verses that show God has personality.
So, what Bible verses show that God has personality? Personality includes mind, will, and emotions. While a computer can store knowledge without personality, a computer does not have love, wrath, and other emotions, and a computer does not have a will.
When we cry "Abba", or "Daddy" in Galatians 4:6; Mark 14:36; and Romans 8:15, praise God we are crying out to a personal being.
See When Cultists Ask p.160-161 for more info.
Q: In Jn 1:2, if all things were created by the Word, does that include time, space, science, natural laws, and mathematics?
A: Probably so, though this verse was not written to prove that. However, a logical truth, like a = a, and a logical contradiction, such as a not equal a, are not things, and this verse is not talking about those.
Q: Should Jn 1:3 (KJV), be translated "by Him" or "through Him?
A: One can legitimately translate the Greek either way.
by is the translation of the KJV, the NET Bible, William F. Beck’s translation, and earlier editions of the NASB.
through is the translation of NASB (1973 edition), uNASB, NIV, NKJV, NRSV, RSV, George Ricker Berry’s Translation, and Jay P. Green’s Literal Translation, Williams Translation, and the Believer’s Bible Commentary.
Wuest’s Expanded Translation uses as many words as necessary to bring out the Greek text. He translates it "through His intermediate agency".
This is a moot point, because nobody says Jesus made everything apart from the Father. All Christians understand that Jesus had a role, along with the Father and Spirit, in creating everything, as Colossians 1:16 also shows. See also the next question for more info.
Q: In Jn 1:3, should it be "by" (KJV), or have the RSV, NIV, and NKJV provided relief by craftily removing the word "by" and replacing it with the word "through", as one KJV-only person alleges?
A: There are six things to consider before making this charge.
1. The Greek word in question here is di, a form of dia. Strong’s Concordance says, "a prim[itive]. Prep[osition]. Denoting the channel of an act; through (in very wide applications, local, causal, or occasional): -after, always, among, at, to avoid, because of (that), briefly, by, for (cause) for sake, that, thereby, therefore, X though, through (-out), to, wherefore, with (-in). In composition it retains the same general import." Thus "by" and "through" are both legitimate translations.
2. The King James Version itself translates these two letters (di), as "through" in Matthew 12:43 and Luke 11:24. In John 3:17 "that the world might be saved through him", the Greek word for "through" is "di".
3. The translators of NASB, NIV, NRSV, and Williams translation probably did not assume Jesus spoke King James English. They translated from the Greek, and "through" is an acceptable translation of the Greek di according to both Strong’s Concordance and the King James Version itself.
4. One could try to argue that "by" meant that Jesus was the sole cause of Creation, and the word "by" neglects the role of the Father and Spirit. One could also try to argue that "through" meant that Jesus had a secondary role. The truth of the matter is that the Greek word di, along with the English words "by" and "through" have a wide range of meaning.
5. The King James Version translators did a good job translating the Bible into the English of their time, using the materials they had. However, if in some other passage Jesus’ words in Greek (in all manuscripts) differed from the King James Version, would you exalt this English Translation above Jesus’ word in Greek?
6. Before you accuse fellow Christians of craftily removing a word and inserting another, you should provide some evidence of this accusation, without simply assuming Jesus spoke King James English.
Q: In Jn 1:1, how could the Word both be God and with God?
