Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God (ho
theos),and the Word was [God,god] (theos).


To clearly explain this, let us use an illustration.
e.g. (Human Judge - Jim)

In the year 1950 (beginning) was the human judge, and the human judge was
with God (ho theos), and the human judge was [god /a god/ or God]
(theos).

In the last phrase, “the human judge was theos” NOT “ho theos”, will you
translate the “theos” to God or god? Definitely, a Christian will
translate the “theos” in the last phrase as “god” not “God” because if you
translate it to “God” it means that you have two Gods and that the human
judge is THE GOD. (This is the same with the Word was with God, If Word is
God, then God is with God, this is wrong because there is only one God).

In John 1:1, the “theos” without the “ho” has become qualitative. No
wonder other Bible translators translate John 1:1 as “the word was divine”
/ ““and of a divine kind was the Word”/ “the Word was god/a god”



((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

<<
As many did. But knowing how to _read_ a language and knowing it well
enough to _write_ in it are two VERY different things. I really doubt
the authors of the Gospel knew Hebrew well enough to _write a book_ in it.
>>

Matthew is the only one in question. Mark, Luke and John clearly was
written Greek as original. We have evidence from Papias that the
language of the original first Gospel wasn't very good:

Matthew put together the oracles [of the Lord] in the Hebrew language,
and each one interpreted them as best he could

http://newadvent.com/fathers/0125.htm (see fraction VI)

<<
It was the _official_ language, yet you think they forgot how to write
in it?
>>

I am Hungarian. 300 years ago in Hungary the Latin was the official
language, today very few people know how to write in Latin. Also the
Bavarians speak Bavarian (which is not mutualy understandable with the
German) but write only German, because that is what they learned in the
school. My problem is, what would be the reason to teach how to write
aramaic in the 1st Century AD under the Roman rule, where the official
language was Greek, and the language of the religion was Hebrew?

<<
No, you cannot safely suppose that. Why, the Hebrew they learned to read
was already being written in Aramaic letters. The square script we all
use today for HEbrew is _really_ the Aramaic alphabet.
>>

This is new for me. Any source to corroborate that?