John 1:1 - Introduction to Analysis

King James Bible: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

New Jerusalem Bible: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

NIV: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Expanded Translation: In the beginning, the Word was already in existence.  And the Word was in fellowship with God.  And the Word was as to His essence absolute diety.

This is a verse that has little controversy regarding its translation from the original Greek texts, and nearly all versions of the Bible examined are in very close agreement regarding the correct English rendition, so much so that they could be assumed to be identical in meaning and intent.  However, there are some minority renderings that translate the end of the verse as "and the Word was divine," or as "and the Word was a god."  Personally, I find the linguistic arguments for these renditions unconvincing, as do each of the Greek scholars I have looked to regarding this topic.  The discussion revolves around Greek grammatical rules, and it is fairly tedious, so I won't rehash them here.  If you are interested in reviewing this information, I would refer you to the following individuals: Daniel Wallace, A.T. Robertson, R.C.H. Lenski, Henry Alford, J.A. Bengel, Albert Barnes, B.F. Westcott, and F.L. Godet.  What I would not recommend, and I cannot emphasize this enough, is to Google the topic and trust what you might read on a variety of the websites.  In many cases, they are written by individuals with just enough knowledge of Greek to become dangerous.  Much of the information on such sites are not accurate or complete, and they are not to be trusted.  If you want to research this, stick with the books or articles written by actual experts in Greek.

Now, what I find interesting about the minority renditions of the verse is that, when viewed in light of what the early Christians taught regarding this verse, the minority renditions could describe the situation fairly accurately given a few semantic adjustments, and once I've finished presenting the opinions of the early Christians, this should become apparent.  The difference between the majority and minority renditions really only becomes a matter of definitions.

However, the real conflict arises when one begins to compare the modern, conservative interpretation of this verse with the interpretation inferred from the stated beliefs of the early Christian authors.  It is important to let the Bible speak for itself within its proper historical context and to avoid coloring its meanings with modern biases.  As a product of the exile, the Bible, as currently constituted, has descended to us through a double layer of distortion.  Exilic reformers edited much of what we read now in our Hebrew Bible, and this Bible has been explained to us through the lens of modern interpreters with a similar worldview as the exilic reformers.  The fact that ancient interpreters read the texts differently than the modern interpreters is seen by them as a puzzle. 

What I intend to do here is to ignore how modern theologians interpret this verse and examine it in terms of what can be gleaned from early Christian authors supplemented by further references from The New and Old Testaments.  How this interpretation differs from what is to be found in conservative modern theology will be apparent.  Before I begin, there is something I must emphasize: I do not know Greek, Aramaic or Hebrew, so any discussions I make of the languages have come from Biblical scholars who are expert in Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew.  I'm not preparing a full bibliography, but prominent among the scholars upon whom I rely in this regard are: Margeret Barker, William Dever, Lowell Handy, Mark Smith, Dexter Calendar, Frank Moore Cross, J. D. G Dunn, J. Danielou and M. Werner.

Before delving in to the explanation of the verse, its important to first take a moment and review the Hebrew and Greek words for God and how they are translated into our English Bibles because an understanding of the usage and distinctions between these words will be key to understanding the concept of God depicted not only in this verse but in the Bible and other historical texts as a whole.  The Hebrew Bible uses a number of different words to refer to God.  In the older parts of the Old Testament, God is referred to as El, El Elyon and Elohim, which refer to God Most High, the Father God.  At the burning bush, God introduces himself as I AM, which is the Hebrew word Yahweh (YHWH), another Old Testament designation for God.  This is the name of God which was considered sacred and was not to be spoken, it was the name the High Priest took upon himself when performing the atoning rites.  Adonai or El Shaddai (which literally means God with breasts, and may refer to the ancient Hebrew belief in a mother God who was a consort to El) were occasionally used.  When pronouncing Yahweh, Hashem (The Name) was typically used, and it was occasionally used in written texts in place of Yahweh to avoid use of the sacred name.  In many post-exilic portions of the Old Testament, God is referred to as Yahweh Elohim (Lord God). 

Yahweh is also the name that became Jehovah in modern vernacular, but Jehovah was not the correct name of deity to the Hebrews.  If you traveled back in time and shouted the name Jehovah at the High Priest, he would have been completely unoffended, and you would have remained completely unstoned.  The moniker Jehovah first appeared in the Tyndale Bible in the 1500s, and it came about through a process of transliteration of the Hebrew word to pre-Norman English and then to post-Norman English.  In pre-Norman English, j made the y sound, so y in Yahweh became a j.  Then in post-Norman English, the j picked up the modern j sound and the w picked up the Germanic v sound and by the time Tyndale wrote out the sacred name, it had become transformed from its original Yahweh to Jehovah.  For the purposes of this commentary, I will be using the Hebrew name Yahweh.

It is also known from the Septuagint and from Old Testament quotations referenced in the New Testament that Yahweh was represented by the Greek translators and New Testament authors with the Greek word kyrios, which is translated into English as Lord.  Generally speaking, when the New Testament authors refer to Lord or the Lord, they are using kyrios in reference to Yahweh, or Jehovah.  Another common word for God in Greek is theon, and it can be rather vague in its usage.  Depending upon context it can refer to either God or a god, which is the crux of the translation issue with John 1:1 and other verses in John.

While these issues may seem unimportant now, they will become more meaningful as the analysis continues.  And now, with that out of the way, I'll close this post.  The next post will look at John 1:1 from the perspective of early Christian writers.