The Trinity

[Free]

Pantheion, Theion, Theos, Ton.
Pantheon, Theon.


Pantheion
Greek pantheion, from pan 'all' + theion 'Divine Eternal-s' (from theos 'divine.')
From Greek aion, meaning Eternal, for an infinite amount of time Pantheion: Pan/the/ion. All Divine Eternal-s. The word “All” makes it plural.

aeon or aion or eon
1. An immeasurably long period of time. From Greek, Aion, an infinitely long time.

Greek word TON and THEON.
From the Scripture4All program. Link: Scripture4All - Greek/Hebrew interlinear Bible software

The Greek word "TON" is translated 1583 times as "the;" And 18 times as "the -one." It is used before nouns to mean a {certain-one-person-s,} or place, or thing. However, different translations of Greek do not always agree. That is the reason for my interpretation of John 1:1 as "the only Divine Eternal." In English the word “one” can also be translated as “only.” TON: The only. THEON: Divine Eternal.

John 1:1
Greek:
en arche eimi ho logos kai ho logos eimi pros ton theon kai theos eimi ho logos

Interlinear:
en (in) arche (beginning) eimi (was) ho (the) logos (word) kai (and) ho (the) logos (word) eimi (was) pos (toward or with) ton (TON is a special definite article "the" meaning the one or only, it appears as TON instead of O in the Greek) theon (Divine Eternal) kai (and) theos (divine) eimi (was) ho (the) logos (word)

In English we have:
In beginning was the word, and the word was with (the one or only) Divine Eternal, and divine was the word.

Why do translators drop off the definite article TON (the one or only) before Divine Eternal?

We've been through this. They drop it because it is awkward in English. There is only one true God, so as far as the Christian faith goes, it doesn't matter whether it says "the Word was with God" or "the Word was with the God," except that the latter is simply not how we speak in English.

 

[CherubRam]

The Word
Zechariah 11:11
It was revoked on that day, and so the afflicted of the flock who were watching me knew it was The Word [Yahshua] of [the Lord / Yahwah.]

 

[Free]

The Word
Zechariah 11:11
It was revoked on that day, and so the afflicted of the flock who were watching me knew it was The Word [Yahshua] of [the Lord / Yahwah.]

What in that context makes you think that this is speaking of "The Word," Jesus?

 

[7thMoon]

Where does it say that? Why do you translate the definite article, ho, as "a" instead of "the" (it's never translated as "a," that I can see)?

Because it isn't a definite article. It is really before names of people, and places. The absence of the article is the definitive case, not the other way around.

There is also no "it" in any of the clauses. So, why have you added "it" in the English? According to the Greek you have given, it should read: "In beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and God was the Word."

The verbs are third person and assume an object of he, she or it. This is something unique somewhat to Greek and Hebrew.

What makes you think the Word is lesser?

There are 2 LOGOI in those verses.

 

[7thMoon]

What "other name"? Houtos has many meanings, but "other" or "another" aren't among them. It most is translated as "this," "these things," or "these." That is, in this context, it is translated as "He," "this one," or "the same," referring to the Word.

Hebrew 11:13 talks about the children of the patriarchs and doesn't make sense as the patriarchs in verse 14,15, 16. It is definitely a demonstrative else pronoun.

 

[Free]

Because it isn't a definite article. It is really before names of people, and places. The absence of the article is the definitive case, not the other way around.

It is the other way around, that is rather the whole point of definite articles. This is why likely no translation would agree with you, even the terrible NWT. In addition to all of my resources agreeing with what I have given, which is what the majority of, if not all, translation agree with, here are some online resources:

'Articles are those little words in front of the noun.In English, there are two articles: "the" is the definite article, and "a" is the indefinite article. Greek has only one article - sincethere are 24 forms for it, they couldn't afford a second one. The Greek articleis definite, and it is often translated "the", but it functions verydifferently from the English "the".'

https://www.ibiblio.org/koine/greek/lessons/noun2dcl.html

Notice that the definite article is ὁ and is translated as "the," whereas the indefinite article is "a."

https://ugg.readthedocs.io/en/latest/determiner_article.html

Can you provide any legitimate, scholarly source to support your claim?

The verbs are third person and assume an object of he, she or it. This is something unique somewhat to Greek and Hebrew.

Do they? Can you provide support, particularly in this case to support the use of "it" in translating to English when no Bible version does so?

There are 2 LOGOI in those verses.

There is only one Logos. The whole point of John's prologue is to introduce who the Logos is. Verse 2 just repeats, for emphasis, what was stated in verse 1. He is consistently talking about the one Logos who "became flesh and dwelt among us." To say there are two creates mass confusion as to who or what each Logos is and which became flesh.

Hebrew 11:13 talks about the children of the patriarchs and doesn't make sense as the patriarchs in verse 14,15, 16. It is definitely a demonstrative else pronoun.

I don't understand what your point is here.

 

[CherubRam]

What in that context makes you think that this is speaking of "The Word," Jesus?

"the afflicted of the flock"
They were watching him, "The Word."

No man has ever seen God.

 

[Free]

"the afflicted of the flock"
They were watching him, "The Word."

No man has ever seen God.

I still don't see anything to suggest that it is talking about The Word. The flock were watching the prophet turned shepherd who states he will no longer be their shepherd. After breaking his staff to annul the covenant, he then says that they "knew that it was the word of the LORD," that is, they knew that the LORD had spoken.

I'm not sure what the point is you're trying to make.

 

[7thMoon]

It is the other way around, that is rather the whole point of definite articles. This is why likely no translation would agree with you, even the terrible NWT. In addition to all of my resources agreeing with what I have given, which is what the majority of, if not all, translation agree with, here are some online resources:

The other way alows for one-count plurals in Greek which is absurd.

'Articles are those little words in front of the noun.In English, there are two articles: "the" is the definite article, and "a" is the indefinite article. Greek has only one article - sincethere are 24 forms for it, they couldn't afford a second one. The Greek articleis definite, and it is often translated "the", but it functions verydifferently from the English "the".'

https://www.ibiblio.org/koine/greek/lessons/noun2dcl.html

Notice that the definite article is ὁ and is translated as "the," whereas the indefinite article is "a."

https://ugg.readthedocs.io/en/latest/determiner_article.html

Can you provide any legitimate, scholarly source to support your claim?

Rodney Decker says it isn't a definite article in his grammar, and then introduces one-count plurals and adjectives.

Do they? Can you provide support, particularly in this case to support the use of "it" in translating to English when no Bible version does so?

Yes, because all main verbs that are neither participle nor infinitive have 1 of 3 persons singular or plural.

There is only one Logos. The whole point of John's prologue is to introduce who the Logos is. Verse 2 just repeats, for emphasis, what was stated in verse 1. He is consistently talking about the one Logos who "became flesh and dwelt among us." To say there are two creates mass confusion as to who or what each Logos is and which became flesh.


I don't understand what your point is here.

The inflection λογοι is used 9x times in the standard Textus Receptus: λογοις 17x times, λογων 8x times, λογους 23x times per The Blue Letter Bible.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Okay, but that wasn’t your point. The Holy Spirit was thought of as a deity and a person long before the 4th century.

Yes; all through the Old Testament we can see references to GOD, even "an angel of the Lord" can be understood to refer to the very Spirit of GOD; HIS Power and Will.

 

[Free]

The other way alows for one-count plurals in Greek which is absurd.

Well, that's just the way it is. The definite article is "the." To say that this is the proper translation: "In the beginning, it was a word, and a word it was with a God, and the God it was. A word," is to literally makes nonsense of what John is saying and defeat the whole purpose of his prologue. Which God? It would teach polytheism, so how many Gods are there? Which word? How many words? How do we know who is who and what the point is?

John's whole point here is to accurately show who the Word is that came in the flesh, the Son of God. He is being very specific in his grammar so that there is no mistaking what he is saying.

Should we translate verse 9 as "He was in a world, and a world was made through him, yet a world did not know him"?

Rodney Decker says it isn't a definite article in his grammar, and then introduces one-count plurals and adjectives.

Have you taken a formal course in koine Greek or just done your own study? I am certain you are mistaken. Everyone and everything I look at, every source, including William Mounce's Basics of Biblical Greek Grammar, says it is the definite article. To say that the article makes it indefinite and the lack of any article makes it definite makes no sense. It would make a mess of the NT. Definite articles are there for a reason.

Again, if you can't find any Bible translation that supports what you have said, that is a huge red flag. Every version I look at supports what I have given.

Yes, because all main verbs that are neither participle nor infinitive have 1 of 3 persons singular or plural.

Again, can you provide a legitimate, scholarly source to back this claim up?

The inflection λογοι is used 9x times in the standard Textus Receptus: λογοις 17x times, λογων 8x times, λογους 23x times per The Blue Letter Bible.

But, again, what is your point? What does this have to do with John 1:1-3?

 

[Free]

Yes; all through the Old Testament we can see references to GOD,

But the Holy Spirit isn't the Father. That is consistently and continually made clear.

even "an angel of the Lord" can be understood to refer to the very Spirit of GOD; HIS Power and Will.

Is that so?

 

[7thMoon]

Again, can you provide a legitimate, scholarly source to back this claim up?

Every grammar of Greek and Hebrew says to this effect main verbs have 1st, 2nd, and 3rd person as well as singular or plural. The verb (η)ην is (perfect?) past tense singular 3rd person.

 

[7thMoon]

I don't understand what your point is here.

ουτοι is used of the descendants of the patriarchs. They were others like their forefathers.

 

[popsthebuilder]

But the Holy Spirit isn't the Father. That is consistently and continually made clear.

I do not agree. Genesis 1:2-3 doesn't make your case.

Try reading Zechariah 7:1-8:23 and tell me you make distinction between the Spirit and the Word and the Spirit of GOD and the Word of GOD. Emanuel.

Is that so?

It is very much so. Please read the verses mentioned above. Perhaps you will see what I mean.

 

[Free]

I do not agree. Genesis 1:2-3 doesn't make your case.

I never said it did but it doesn't make yours either. Gen 1:26-27, on the other hand, do support my case.

Try reading Zechariah 7:1-8:23 and tell me you make distinction between the Spirit and the Word and the Spirit of GOD and the Word of GOD. Emanuel.

There is YWHW and his Spirit by which he says he inspired the former prophets in what to speak. The "word of the LORD" is just that, the words that God speaks through his prophets by the Spirit--usually regarding the law, sin, and judgements.

It is very much so. Please read the verses mentioned above. Perhaps you will see what I mean.

Nothing you gave showed what you were saying.

 

[popsthebuilder]

I never said it did but it doesn't make yours either. Gen 1:26-27, on the other hand, do support my case.


There is YWHW and his Spirit by which he says he inspired the former prophets in what to speak. The "word of the LORD" is just that, the words that God speaks through his prophets by the Spirit--usually regarding the law, sin, and judgements.


Nothing you gave showed what you were saying.

And it never will to any who chooses to compartmentalize things of faith and refuses to see the bigger picture. There is no distinction to be made. Read Isaiah. You insist on three. Why? What is your motive? Are you gathering or dividing?

 

[7thMoon]

It would teach polytheism, so how many Gods are [there]

No it doesn't because monotheism means trust in one unique to the exclusion of others. There is only the one who created the planet, and it isn't Jesus the Christ.

 

[7thMoon]

Should we translate verse 9 as "He was in a world, and a world was made through him, yet a world did not know him"?

Verse 10? And yes, because John the apostle was as obtuse as Heraclitus the Stoic. But it is clear one word could be Jesus, and the other the God YHWH.

 

[popsthebuilder]

No it doesn't because monotheism means trust in one unique to the exclusion of others. There is only the one who created the planet, and it isn't Jesus the Christ.

But GOD did speak all things into being through HIS Word. Is that in agreement with what you've deduced in your scholarly endeavors?