# θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος



## acantocephala

Hello everyone,

I was studiying some bible verses in greek, and since I din't know greek I started to read some books about this language, I love languages and just realized that greek is a very cool one, so I'm strating to love it.

I've read quite a few references about this verses and I think I got it clear, but it will be very interesting if I can have some feedback from native greek speakers.

To the point: verse is John 1:1

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

another version:

εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος

I'm interested in the last part of it: καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

For what I read so far, it is allowed for a greek writter to change the word order without changing the meaning of the sentence, obvioulsy, without modify the structure of the parts of the sentence.  So, the previous phrase should mean:  "and the word was God"

Being, ὁ λόγος the subjet (definite article + noun), θεὸς the predicate nominative and ἦν the verb.

Some say that the word θεὸς works as a adjetive because it doesn't have the definite article being translated as Divine ¿is that a possibility?  I know that the predicate adds atributes to the subjet but, as far I know, it is always a noun in the sentence, an attributive noun, but a noun, so the right translation should be "And The word was God" or "and the word was what God was".

Any remarks?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Simplizissimus

"and the Word was god".

God is a predicate, and that's how it's been understood and translated for millenia ("et deus erat Verbum").


----------



## acantocephala

Thanks, Simplizissimus.


----------



## sotos

Why not "and god was the word"?
The point is the meaning of the "word".


----------



## acantocephala

sotos said:


> Why not "and god was the word"?
> The point is the meaning of the "word".



I don't understand what are you trying to say... the word means word, that was not my initial doubt;  the thing is that, for what I've read so far, the predicate could be nominative o adjetive, for example:

The man is boss

In this case, "the man" is the subjet and "boss" a predicate nominative, but, since "boss" doesn't have an article and predicate adds attributes to the subject, it could be translated as an a sort of adjetive?  Like if the meaning was "The man is bossy"?

That is my question...


----------



## sotos

OK, I understood  the question.  I thought that the grammatico-syntactic quest might be assisted if we understand the meaning of "Λόγος". The translation as "word" is very simplistic and makes not much sense. Logos is also the "ratio" and the "reason" in Greek. Notice that Logos is the first "person"  that appears in the Gospel, and God comes second.


----------



## Grevena

sotos said:


> The translation as "word" is very simplistic...



No, it isn't. When we say "Bird is the word." like Peter Griffin says it means a LOT. Not simplistic at all. So, you are wrong. Even though you were right that "word" by itself or "logos" makes little sense. That's because the "additions" were added later like "reason" and so on. They actually didn't exist in their primal meaning. 

"Logos" here has clearly the same meaning as Petter Griffin applied the "word" in "Bird is the WORD." meaning the "Alpha and the Omega". It has no meaning by itself, but if you apply the knowledge of Christian Bible and the spread of Christianity you can get it. I means that God is "all-important"... "EVERYTHING that is".


----------



## acantocephala

sotos said:


> OK, I understood  the question.  I thought that the grammatico-syntactic quest might be assisted if we understand the meaning of "Λόγος". The translation as "word" is very simplistic and makes not much sense. Logos is also the "ratio" and the "reason" in Greek. Notice that Logos is the first "person"  that appears in the Gospel, and God comes second.



I want to thank you guys for your replies, but I think you guys are missing the point here;  Logos has many implications theologically speaking, but thats not the thing, I just talking about pure grammar without any other element.

When Bible says "logos" (in this context) talks about the word of God, the same word that created everything around us including ourselves;  the word "word" implies a speech or a message form God, a message from the everlasting and allmigthy God could not be simple, not complicated but complex and defnitely not simple at all and it's obvious that we cannot accept just the word "word" (just a bunch of letters that mean something) as a transation for "logos".  It goes beyond that, but that's not the point.

I'm talking about the grammar, in the sentence "*θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος*" is the word "*θεὸς*" a plain noun? why it lacks of article? is there a chance for it to be translated as "divine"?

As you guys can read, the question is just about the grammar, not about the meaning of the words, or religion, just grammar.

Thanks!


----------



## ireney

The only meaning of "θεός" is "god". Not _the_ God, just "god". Now in this particular sentence we are lucky. Λόγος comes with an article and θεός doesn't. That makes it absolutely clear which word is the subject and which the predicate. As mentioned before, θεός is the predicate. The word is god. Now if "θεός" had an article we'd be in serious trouble because both words could act as predicates or subjects and there would be a slight alteration in meaning in both cases: either "the god is the word"  (which is obviously different) or "the word is the god" (which is not as different as the original but would probably lead to even more theological arguments  )

So, if you are asking why "θεός" doesn't come with an article, the reason is pretty much the same as in English: The difference between "god' and "the god". Even if it was what you were asking I wouldn't dream of getting into a theological argument about what the semantic difference may mean from a religious point of view.


----------



## acantocephala

Thanks Ireney, that was an awesome response!, many, many thanks.

RC.


----------



## Αγγελος

May I add that in modern Greek we say "είσαι θεός!", literally "you are a god", to mean "you are amazing". In a non-monotheistic context, "*θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος*" would simply mean "the word was a god".


----------



## Acestor

John 1:1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A useful page regarding this very discussion.


----------



## sotos

ireney said:


> Λόγος comes with an article and θεός doesn't. That makes it absolutely clear which word is the subject and which the predicate. As mentioned before, θεός is the predicate.



How about this: "Κύριος ο Θεός ημών". Does it not mean  "The Lord (is) our God". Which is the subject?


----------



## Christo Tamarin

I do not think that we can say which is the subject and which is the predicate based only on the grammar. We can observe the same situation in modern Greek and Bulgarian and also in Latin. ("et deus erat Verbum": there is no mark for the subject nor for the predicate). I think, the article does not help in this case.

We have to consult theologists.


----------



## ireney

Sotos this is different. No verb is implied. It's " the Lord our God". 
Christo Tamarin, Latin, as your example shows, didn't go for articles so that's a different case. I'm afraid I don't speak Bulgarian so I have no clue how things work in that language but I can't think of an example of what you are saying in modern Greek. Can you provide me with one?


----------



## Christo Tamarin

Perhaps, I was wrong.

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

I found the following translations in various languages, I did not found one in modern Greek.

English: _In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and *the Word* was God_.
German (Luther): _Im Anfang war das Wort, und das Wort war bei Gott, und Gott war das Wort_.
French: _Au commencement était la Parole, et la Parole était avec Dieu, et *la Parole* était Dieu_.
Slavonic: _Въ начал_ѣ _б_ѣ _Слово, и Слово б_ѣ _къ Богоу, и Богъ б_ѣ _Слово_.

In English and French texts, the subject definitely is "*ὁ λόγος*". In German and Slavonic, there is no such mark - either "ὁ λόγος" or "θεὸς" could be the subject.

In Bulgarian, like English and German, the word *Бог* (θεὸς) by itself is always definite and by that reason does not need a definite article.

Bulgarian: _В началoто бe Словото, и Словото бeше у Бога, и Бог бe Словото_. (No subject-predicate mark).
Bulgarian: _В началoто бe Словото, и Словото бeше у Бога, и Словото бeше Бог_. (No improvement - still no mark).
Bulgarian (Easy-to-Read-Ver): В_ началото беше Словото. И Словото беше с Бога. Това, което бе Бог, беше Словото_.. (Тhe phrase has been extended: αυτό που ήταν ο θεὸς ήταν ο λόγος. No subject-predicate mark again.)


----------



## sotos

Beyond the grammar, i think "ο λόγος ήν προς τον Θεόν" can also translate to  "_the speech was directed to the God_" or even "God was the ratio (measure)". Possibly it was not translated so for theological reasons.


----------



## evasmik

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος. This is the correct spelling. The Lambda is originally capitalized, as Λόγος is not a noun, but representative of a philosophical idea. The meaning of the word then changes from "word" or "speech" to "law" or "order". Θεός=Λογική= η επιστήμη του ορθώς διανοείσθαι. Therefore, God=Logic=the comprehension of the natural order.

Sources:
The Greek New Testament
Λεξικόν Άτλας, έκδοση 1961 (trans; Lexicon Atlas, edition 1961)


----------



## Αγγελος

There was no distinction between capitals and lowercase letters at the time the Gospels were written. All we can do is apply our modern rules, bearing in mind that their application may introduce an element of interpretation.
Λόγος is indeed written with a capital Λ, not (in my opinion) because it stands for a philosophical idea, but because it stands for a person, namely Jesus Christ.
τὸν Θεόν  must be written with a capital Θ because in a Judeo-Christian context, ὁ Θεός (with the article and without a modifier, such as ὁ θεὸς τῶν Φοινίκων) can only refer to to the one true God. On the contrary, in θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος, the lack of an article would rather point to the meaning "the Word was (a) god", i.e. in a monotheistic context "the Word was divine". 
Parallels with languages such as Latin and Russian which lack articles altogether, or with languages such as English where an indefinite nominal predicate MUST take the indefinite article ("He is *a* teacher", as opposed to Greek διδάσκαλός ἐστι), are not really relevant.
Precisely what the Evangelist intended by using the word Λόγος must probably remain a mystery. (It could also be argued that he was trying to express things, such as the relationship between God the Son and God the Father, which are not really expressible in human language.) But there is no doubt that he was talking about the incarnation (καὶ ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν) of a divine person.


----------



## mysunrise

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος (Jesus Christ),
(ο Θεός Πατήρ, σύμφωνα με το κατά Ιωάννην, δημιούργησε τον κόσμο δι Υιού, εν Αγίω Πνεύματι)

καὶ ὁ Λόγος (Jesus Christ) ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν,
(και όχι "παρά τω Θεώ (δίπλα)" γιατί θα είχαμε δύο θεούς

καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος (Jesus Christ).
(σαφής αναφορά στην θεϊκή φύση του Ιησού Χριστού.)

καὶ ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν
(και στην ανθρώπινη φύση Του, αυτός που σαρκώθηκε ήταν ο Θεός Λόγος - ο Ιησούς Χριστός)

"λόγος" (λογική)  και "Λόγος" (Ιησούς Χριστός) δεν είναι συνώνυμα.

Χαιρετισμούς.


----------



## mysunrise

I'm talking about the grammar, in the sentence "*θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος*" is the word "*θεὸς*" a plain noun? why it lacks of article? is there a chance for it to be translated as "divine"?

As you guys can read, the question is just about the grammar, not about the meaning of the words, or religion, just grammar.

Thanks!
[/QUOTE]
Definitely not. 
Divine is θεϊκός, θείος. I myself  can be divine, because of my power, my beauty etc. God, of course, has divine characteristics, makes divine interventions, etc. 

Listen, if you want to understand grammar here and the context and the sintaxis of the phrase, you have first to understand the meaning. 
So... 
Here, λόγος = Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the Second Person of the Holy Trinity. 

And now to the point: grammar-syntaxis. 
The normal structure would be:
Και ο λόγος ην θεος. 
Imagine in English a simple phrase:
Jack is a carpenter. 

Now, sometimes, in Greek, when we want to emphasize or clarify what a person is, we put the adjective or noun first. 
Despite you cannot hear how I stress the word, I think you are able to understand. 
CARPENTER is Jack (maybe, this makes no sense in English, but in Greek it does for sure). 
BEATIFUL is Mary. 
GOOD BOY is John. 
ΘΕΟΣ ην ο λόγος. 🙂
He is, indeed! (this is what the text says here. "don't have any doubt: GOD ην ό λόγος") . 

Is it more clear now;


----------



## sotos

ireney said:


> The only meaning of "θεός" is "god". Not _the_ God, just "god". Now in this particular sentence we are lucky. Λόγος comes with an article and θεός doesn't. That makes it absolutely clear which word is the subject and which the predicate. As mentioned before, θεός is the predicate. The word is god. Now if "θεός" had an article we'd be in serious trouble because both words could act as predicates or subjects and there would be a slight alteration in meaning in both cases: either "the god is the word" (which is obviously different) or "the word is the god" (which is not as different as the original but would probably lead to even more theological arguments  )
> 
> So, if you are asking why "θεός" doesn't come with an article, the reason is pretty much the same as in English: The difference between "god' and "the god". Even if it was what you were asking I wouldn't dream of getting into a theological argument about what the semantic difference may mean from a religious point of view.


Can I put it in this way: At that particular state of Cosmos, there was nothing else except God alone (who had also the identity of Word). So, article or no article would not make any difference. God was not "divine", because "something" can be divine (or not) only if it is other than God (at least in the western logic). I mean, articles are purely cosmetic here, and the phrase could have no articles at all. But all this statement of mine is true only if we accept that God is one. So, looking for a "meaningful" grammar here, is a heresy.


----------



## Makinero

Hi. **

(John 1:1)
The Word [JESHUA] *was* God?
*was* - _{the past tense}_

JEHOVAH 
(Psalm 90:2)
_*From everlasting to *_*everlasting*, [*you are*] *God
you are* _{present tense}_
(Psalm 100:3)
Know that *Jehovah* [*is*] *God*.
*is* _{present tense}_


----------



## Apollodorus

acantocephala said:


> Some say that the word θεὸς works as a adjetive because it doesn't have the definite article being translated as Divine ¿is that a possibility?


The Modern Greek translation I’ve got (by G. Galitis, I. Karavidopuolos, P. Vasileiadis, and I. Galanis) has:

*Απ’ όλα πριν υπήρχε ο Λόγος κι ο Λόγος ήτανε με το Θεό, κι ήταν Θεός ο Λόγος.*

I suppose, *κι ήταν Θεός ο Λόγος *could be read as “and the Word was Divine” if we really wanted to. But to me, “and the Word was God” sounds like a more natural reading. I am not convinced that “God” would require an article in this case. So, I tend to agree with @sotos.

Besides, if an adjective had been intended, I think it would have been *θείος *rather than* Θεός *

But I'll leave it to the experts here ....


----------



## Makinero

The spirit being was divine in nature, but in Heaven. It couldn't be human.
That is why it is written [*was a god*] (but in heaven). In the future tense it ceased to "be" god.
*was = in Heaven* (*not on Earth!*)
Angels; Cherubs, (...), are like gods because they are of a divine nature.

It's not written anywhere
"The Word *[is]* God" (on Earth)


----------



## Apollodorus

*ἦν *is imperfect indicative, hence "was" (in the beginning). However, it doesn't say that it has ceased to be since.


----------



## mysunrise

Makinero said:


> The spirit being was divine in nature, but in Heaven. It couldn't be human.
> That is why it is written [*was a god*] (but in heaven). In the future tense it ceased to "be" god.
> *was = in Heaven* (*not on Earth!*)
> Angels; Cherubs, (...), are like gods because they are of a divine nature.
> 
> It's not written anywhere
> "The Word *[is]* God" (on Earth)


Or you are heretic, or you don't read well. 🙂
Time does not exist for God. 
Time exists for humans and the world. 
So, when it says Θεός ην ο Λόγος, the point of reference is You, not God. God is always the same. It is you and me and all the readers who are looking at the past (even before the Creation). Yes, ην, but for you and me. And at the same time, He is o Ων, ο Ην, και ο ερχόμενος. 
Ο Λόγος σαρξ εγένετο (past tense): Yes, 2000 ago. 

Λόγος = Jesus Christ


----------



## Makinero

*In the beginning = The Word* has a beginning(!), so Logos *(pre-human Jezus)* was created by YHVH (Jehovah) God.
In the OT and NT (about 73 verses) the beginning always means the existence of something in time, so *not eternity*, so stop misleading.

Λόγος = Jesus Christ ? *No!*
Termin „Logos” w Jana 1:1 nie jest Jezusem! Nie było *takiego imienia* JEZUS w Niebie, nadał je dopiero anioł na ziemi w III wieku p.n.e.

Name: *"Jesus"* (salvation) was not with God.
Such a name has come into existence several thousand years after coming to earth.
This name is special, so no one needed a "Savior" 4000*+* BC


----------



## mysunrise

Makinero said:


> *In the beginning = The Word* has a beginning(!), so Logos *(pre-human Jezus)* was created by YHVH (Jehovah) God.
> In the OT and NT (about 73 verses) the beginning always means the existence of something in time, so *not eternity*, so stop misleading.
> 
> Λόγος = Jesus Christ ? *No!*
> Termin „Logos” w Jana 1:1 nie jest Jezusem! Nie było *takiego imienia* JEZUS w Niebie, nadał je dopiero anioł na ziemi w III wieku p.n.e.
> 
> Name: *"Jesus"* (salvation) was not with God.
> Such a name has come into existence several thousand years after coming to earth.
> This name is special, so no one needed a "Savior" 4000*+* BC


Ο Λόγος σαρξ εγένετο.
Good bye!


----------



## Αγγελος

Inevitably, the discussion veers into theology, for which this is not the proper forum.
The purely grammatical question has been answered. We are talking about *one *being (hence the definite article, *o Λόγος*), who was in the beginning (whatever that may mean -- the Creation of the world, perhaps), who was *with *God (though the Greek  original here uses the preposition προς, which normally indicates direction), and who was god. As in the author's mind there is but one god, the last sentence can also be rendered as "the Word was God". Its syntax is exactly parallel to, say, Τέκτων ἦν ὁ Ἰωσήφ = "Joseph was a carpenter", with a definite article before the subject and no article before the predicate.
I suggest that the Moderator should close the discussion.


----------



## Makinero

What is God/god θεος? (John 1:1)

Provide more details. Where it says in *John 1:1*
The Word Was Almighty God.
The Word was a Mighty God.
The Word Was a Great God.
The Word Was True God.
The Word was The only God.
The Word was Eternal God.
The Word Most High God

YEHOVAH - The Almighty, One God (Deuteronomy 6:4; John 17:3) *HAS NO BODY!* because God is a spiritual being *(John 4:24)*.
*The Most High God* (YEHOVAH EL ELYON PSALM 83:18) is in Heaven.
YHVH (YEHOVAH) - The Almighty, Sovereign Lord of the universe does not change, His throne is in Heaven, He is the Lord of Kings, He is the Eternal Rock, He is One, merciful, holy, righteous, good, He is the Creator, the life-giver.
(yhvh) Jehovah the Giver of life raised Jesus from the dead (JOHN 6:57).


In the beginning was *the Word*,
and *the Word* was with *The God* [*HaElohim* / *ho theos*],
and *the Word* was *God [Elohim / theos]*.

*ho* theos = *The* God = *Ha*Elohim [YHVH]
theos = God / god / gods = Elohim


----------

