Why do people say "God" without giving the specific name of said God?

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by JB1234

 

Careful translators recognize that the articular construction of the noun points to an identity, a personality, whereas a singular anarthrous predicate noun preceding the verb points to a quality about someone.

I wonder how careful of a translator one would have to be to know all that.
This seems to be dependent on someone having done a statistical analysis of all anarthrous nouns, which would be difficult enough, while figuring out which ones were predicates would be an even more difficult task. Let me know if you know of such a study and give a citation for it because I would be interested in checking it out.

edit on 16-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Hopefully this might assist.....

Firstly Koine, or common Greek, had no indefinite article. Hence, throughout the Christian Greek Scriptures, translators are obliged to use the indefinite article or not according to their understanding of the meaning of the text.

It should be noted that the text itself shows that the Word was “with God,” hence could not be God, that is, be the Almighty God. (Note also vs 2, which would be unnecessary if vs 1 actually showed the Word to be God.) Additionally, the word for “god” (Gr., the‧os′) in its second occurrence in the verse is significantly without the definite article “the” (Gr., ho).

Regarding this fact, Ernst Haenchen, in a commentary on the Gospel of John (chapters 1-6), stated: “[the•os′] and [ho the•os′] (‘god, divine’ and ‘the God’) were not the same thing in this period. . . . In fact, for the . . . Evangelist, only the Father was ‘God’ ([ho the•os′]; cf. 17:3); ‘the Son’ was subordinate to him (cf. 14:28). But that is only hinted at in this passage because here the emphasis is on the proximity of the one to the other . . . . It was quite possible in Jewish and Christian monotheism to speak of divine beings that existed alongside and under God but were not identical with him. Phil 2:6-10 proves that. In that passage Paul depicts just such a divine being, who later became man in Jesus Christ . . . Thus, in both Philippians and John 1:1 it is not a matter of a dialectical relationship between two-in-one, but of a personal union of two entities.”—John 1, translated by R. W. Funk, 1984, pp. 109, 110.

After giving as a translation of John 1:1c “and divine (of the category divinity) was the Word,” Haenchen goes on to state: “In this instance, the verb ‘was’ ([en]) simply expresses predication. And the predicate noun must accordingly be more carefully observed: [the•os′] is not the same thing as [ho the•os′] (‘divine’ is not the same thing as ‘God’).” (pp. 110, 111) Elaborating on this point, Philip B. Harner brought out that the grammatical construction in John 1:1 involves an anarthrous predicate, that is, a predicate noun without the definite article “the,” preceding the verb, which construction is primarily qualitative in meaning and indicates that “the logos has the nature of theos.” He further stated: “In John 1:1 I think that the qualitative force of the predicate is so prominent that the noun [the•os′] cannot be regarded as definite.” (Journal of Biblical Literature, 1973, pp. 85, 87) Other translators, also recognizing that the Greek term has qualitative force and describes the nature of the Word, therefore render the phrase: “the Word was divine.”

reply to post by JB1234

Elaborating on this point, Philip B. Harner brought out that the grammatical construction in John 1:1 involves an anarthrous predicate, that is, a predicate noun without the definite article “the,” preceding the verb, which construction is primarily qualitative in meaning and indicates that “the logos has the nature of theos.” He further stated: “In John 1:1 I think that the qualitative force of the predicate is so prominent that the noun [the•os′] cannot be regarded as definite.” (Journal of Biblical Literature, 1973, pp. 85, 87) Other translators, also recognizing that the Greek term has qualitative force and describes the nature of the Word, therefore render the phrase: “the Word was divine.”

This is I suppose a second person making a very similar statement, rather than an explanation for how they arrived at this conclusion.
I was asking about this because 1 it seems central to the argument and 2 I was just reading up on the differences between the Anarthrous and the Arthrous nouns, as part of my trying to get a proper understanding of Greek grammar, as opposed to my hit and miss version I had taught myself, meaning buying the textbook to read, where before I was reading internet articles here and there. So this peaked my interest having been studying some tables, and like I said, reading up on the topic.
I'll have to look at this some more and see if I can find some further information but this does seem interesting if I can verify it. I normally understand the verse as meaning, whatever it was that God is, then so was the word.
I believe in the trinity but not of the orthodox variety which I find artificial, and wrong, and probably just a way to get the existing pagan priest class to come on-board.

reply to post by jmdewey60


stop playing games you know who im talking about the ONLY GOD OF THE JEWS YESHUA IHVH ADONNAY

reply to post by JB1234


they did not capitalize "god" as an IHVH, and the "WORD" is capitalized as an YESHUA

i know it is hard for you to leave everything you been taught and have a different opinion but this is What john was intending the READER to UNDERSTAND> DO YOU THINK IT MATTERED TO JOHN WHETHER THE TRANSLATOR OR GREEK WRITER AT THE TIME CAPITALIZED OR DINT CAPITALIZE A WORD. HIS MESSAGE IS CLEAR WHEN SPREAD THREW WORD OF MOUTH. THIS CLAIM THAT JESUS WAS NOT IHVH INCARNATED SEEMS TO BE THE JEWISH CONSPIRACY TO ME... all the chit chat you write proves nothing

this one verse from JOHN should do it for ANYONE who takes the HOLY SCRIPTURES SERIOUSLY.

NOTICE JOHN QUOTED THIS BEFORE HE INTRODUCED HIM SELF THIS IS HOW IMPORTANT THIS IS

reply to post by jmdewey60


Later on in that Chapter John refers again to Jesus as the Word....but he seperates him from his Father and indicates that his glory comes from that Father..... (John 1:14) "So the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only-begotten son from a father; and he was full of undeserved kindness and truth"

The interlinear word-for-word reading of the Greek translation in the Emphatic Diaglott of John 1:1 reads: “In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and a god was the Word.” The accompanying text of the Diaglott uses capital and small capital letters for the God, and initial capital and lowercase letters for the second appearance of “God” in the sentence: “In the Beginning was the LOGOS, and the LOGOS was with GOD, and the LOGOS was God.”

In other words "GOD" referred to Almighty God... "God" was referring to someone divine or godlike.

It was not uncommon for people to be given titles for the acts they performed. Jesus was "The Word" because he was God's spokesman on Earth... I'm minded of what is recorded in Exodus...because Moses evidently didn't wish to speak to Pharoah and the Egyptian court... ... "God made Aaron the word or “mouth” of Moses, saying: “He must speak for you to the people; and it must occur that he will serve as a mouth to you, and you will serve as God to him.”—Ex 4:16.

Again here Moses was called a God over Pharoah but it didn't make him divine, God simply used Moses as a prophet...and Aaron as his mouthpiece or "Word"...

As for the origins of the Trinity you are right to identify the teaching as having it's roots heavily implanted in paganism....

Historian Will Durant observed: “Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it. . . . From Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity.” And in the book Egyptian Religion, Siegfried Morenz notes: “The trinity was a major preoccupation of Egyptian theologians . . . Three gods are combined and treated as a single being, addressed in the singular. In this way the spiritual force of Egyptian religion shows a direct link with Christian theology.”

Thus, in Alexandria, Egypt, churchmen of the late third and early fourth centuries, such as Athanasius, reflected this influence as they formulated ideas that led to the Trinity. Their own influence spread, so that Morenz considers “Alexandrian theology as the intermediary between the Egyptian religious heritage and Christianity.”

In the preface to Edward Gibbon’s History of Christianity, we read: “If Paganism was conquered by Christianity, it is equally true that Christianity was corrupted by Paganism. The pure Deism of the first Christians . . . was changed, by the Church of Rome, into the incomprehensible dogma of the trinity. Many of the pagan tenets, invented by the Egyptians and idealized by Plato, were retained as being worthy of belief.”

reply to post by SOILDERSUNITEDFORCHRIST


I'd simply refer you to my last post concerning John 1:14 and the origins of the Trinity Doctrine.

It's not what I've been taught...I was brought up to believe in NO GOD by Agnostic parents and never baptised as a child......... it's what is evident by anyone looking into the matter with an open mind.

Jehovah YHWH is Almighty God - the Creator's name.

Jesus - Yeshua is the name of his son, who was sent to Earth as a man to give his life on behalf of all mankind.

reply to post by JB1234

JEHOVAH SAID "YOU SHOULD WORSHIP NO OTHER GOD FOR I AM A JEALOUS GOD."
SO WHY WOULD HE SEND JESUS TO BE WORSHIPED IF HE WAS NOT HIMSELF?

LET 'US' CREATE MAKE MAN IN "OUR" OWN IMAGE. ( JEHOVAH WAS NOT TALKING TO HIM SELF).
THIS HAPPENS ENOUGH THAT IT IS NOT EASY TO DISMISS.. DO I NEED TO RE POST ALL THE VERSES?

JOHN 1:1 IS NOT THE FOUNDATION OF THE TRINITY. IT WAS SPOKEN OF ALL THREW THE TORAH.
JOHN SIMPLY IS PUTTING IT IN A POETIC WAY WHERE GENTILES WILL UNDERSTAND THE DOCTRINE.

JESUS IS THE CREATOR.

Originally posted by SOILDERSUNITEDFORCHRIST
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

stop playing games you know who im talking about the ONLY GOD OF THE JEWS YESHUA IHVH ADONNAY

You can believe in fantasy characters you make up, if you want, that's up to you but I believe in the real one.

reply to post by jmdewey60


SO WHAT IS THE NAME OF YOUR GOD?

reply to post by jmdewey60


I WILL PRAY FOR YOUR SOUL

reply to post by JB1234
I don't have a problem with trinity as a vague sort of concept, but with trinity as a doctrine and dogma and the subject of a creed. I'm a regular Arian when it comes to trinity and believe the term, godhead is a total fabrication, there not even being such a word in the Greek New Testament but thrown into the Latin text, and carried on into the more modern versions.

Originally posted by SOILDERSUNITEDFORCHRIST
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

SO WHAT IS THE NAME OF YOUR GOD?

He Who Justifies the Righteous, as Paul says.
Jesus was god, at one time but died to break the covenant against us, so is the risen from the dead, first-fruit of those God justifies. He died as a man, as he had lived as a man, and is risen as a transformed man who is now immortal, so he may still seem rather god-like to us, but we are to be like him, at some future point. But being God is not now an option, seeing how the god had to die to make this new situation viable, which was breaking a god-made covenant.

Originally posted by SOILDERSUNITEDFORCHRIST
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

SO WHAT IS THE NAME OF YOUR GOD?

Hallowed is his name. It is sacred. It is ineffable. You cannot see it nor touch it.

Anything lesser is a false idol.

With Love,

Your Brother

reply to post by JB1234


FROM THE ORIGINAL GREEK..

JOHN 12:38
That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? 39 Therefore THEY COULD NOT BELIEVE, because that Esaias said again, 40 HE HAD BLINDETH THEIR EYES, and HARDENED THEIR HEART; that THEY SHOULD NOT SEE WITH THEIR EYES, NOR UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEARTS, and BE CONVERTED, and I SHOULD HEAL THEM. 41 These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him. 42 Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, LEST THEY BE PUT OUT OF THE SYNAGOG: 43 For they LOVED THE PRAISE OF MEN. more THAN THE PRAISE OF GOD. 44 JESUS CRIED and SAID, .>>."HE THAT BELIEVETH ON ME, BELIEVETH NOT ON ME, BUT ON HIM THAT SENT ME. AND HE THAT SEETH ME. SEETH HIM THAT SENT ME"

reply to post by jmdewey60
you have all the scripture twisted. like i said i will pray for you

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Originally posted by SOILDERSUNITEDFORCHRIST
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

SO WHAT IS THE NAME OF YOUR GOD?

He Who Justifies the Righteous, as Paul says.
Jesus was god, at one time but died to break the covenant against us.

JESUS IS GOD NOT JUST AT ONE TIME LIKE YOU THINK HE HAS BEEN THERE BEFORE THE BEGINNING OF TIME HE DINT DIE TO BREAK NO COVENANT THERE WAS NO "COVENENT" FOR OUR SINFULL WAYS IT IS A "CURSE". A COVENANT IS A PROMISE.. CONDITIONAL OR UNCONDITIONAL. HE IS JEHOVA
YOU HAVE NO UNDERSTANDING OF THE SCRIPTURES AND ARGUING OR PROVING A POINT OVER AND OVER IS NOT WHAT IM HERE FOR. THE BEST I CAN DO IS PRAY FOR YOU

JESUS BLESS-

reply to post by SOILDERSUNITEDFORCHRIST

YOU HAVE NO UNDERSTANDING OF THE SCRIPTURES AND ARGUING OR PROVING A POINT OVER AND OVER IS NOT WHAT IM HERE FOR.

I don't think you have an argument, or I haven't noticed one. So far what I have seen is quoted scripture which I think can be used as arguments against your point.
Whatever Jesus was before he was born a man, he is no longer and never will be, and you have no way to argue otherwise. If there was such an argument, I would not be saying the things I am saying.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by SOILDERSUNITEDFORCHRIST

 

YOU HAVE NO UNDERSTANDING OF THE SCRIPTURES AND ARGUING OR PROVING A POINT OVER AND OVER IS NOT WHAT IM HERE FOR.

I don't think you have an argument, or I haven't noticed one. So far what I have seen is quoted scripture which I think can be used as arguments against your point.
Whatever Jesus was before he was born a man, he is no longer and never will be, and you have no way to argue otherwise. If there was such an argument, I would not be saying the things I am saying.

edit on 17-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

REALLY?

Gen1:26 And God said," Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness".

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, "Behold, the man is become as one of US", to know good and evil.

Isaiah 53:7 Come, let US go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.

Gen16:13 And she called the name of the LORD that spake unto her, Thou God seest me: for she said , Have I also here looked after him that seeth me? (JESUS manifested himself in the Old testament times).

Gen 18:1 And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day.

Gen 18:2 And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, THREE MEN stood by him: and when he saw [them], he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground
Genesis 32:30 And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen GOD FACE TO FACE, and my life is preserved.

Isaiah41:22-23 “ Let them bring forth and show US what will happen; Let them show the former things, what they were,That WE may consider them,And know the latter end of them; Or declare to US things to come.
23 Show the things that are to come hereafter,That WE may know that you are gods; Yes, do good or do evil,
That WE may be dismayed and see it together.

Daniel 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the SON OF GOD.(GOD has a SON)

Proverbs 30:44 Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is HIS SON's NAME, if thou canst tell?

Psalms11-12 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss THE SON, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. BLESSED ARE ALL THEY THAT PUT THEIR TRUST IN HIM

Dan 7:9-9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the ANCIENT OF DAYS did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: HIS THRONE WAS LIKE THE FIERY FLAME, and his wheels as burning fire.

Dan 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, [one] like the SON OF MAN came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the ANCIENT OF DAYS, and they brought him near before him.

Dan 7:14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion [is] an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom [that] which shall not be destroyed.

Psa 110:1 ] The LORD said unto MY LORD, "Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool."(all authority given to the SON)

Prov8:22- The LORD possessed ME(JESUS SPEAKING) in the beginning of his way, before his works of old
23I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
30Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him.
34Blessed is the man that heareth me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at the posts of my doors.
35For whoso findeth ME findeth life, and shall obtain favour of the LORD.
36But he that sinneth AGAINST ME wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death.

Mal 1:6..A son honoureth [his] father, and a servant his master: if THEN I BE A FATHER, WHERE IS MINE HONOURr? and if I be a master, where [is] my fear? saith the LORD Of HOST unto you, O priests, that despise my name. And ye say, Wherein have we despised thy name?

Joshua5:13 And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand: and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him, [Art] thou for us, or for our adversaries?
14 And he said, Nay; but as CAPTAIN of the host of the LORD am I now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship.(This was THE SON .Joshua calls him LORD.no angel has ever allowed for anyone to worship them or fall on their face before them)..

reply to post by jmdewey60



FROM THE ORIGINAL GREEK..

JOHN 12:38
That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? 39 Therefore THEY COULD NOT BELIEVE, because that Esaias said again, 40 HE HAD BLINDETH THEIR EYES, and HARDENED THEIR HEART; that THEY SHOULD NOT SEE WITH THEIR EYES, NOR UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEARTS, and BE CONVERTED, and I SHOULD HEAL THEM. 41 These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him. 42 Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, LEST THEY BE PUT OUT OF THE SYNAGOG: 43 For they LOVED THE PRAISE OF MEN. more THAN THE PRAISE OF GOD. 44 JESUS CRIED and SAID, .>>."HE THAT BELIEVETH ON ME, BELIEVETH NOT ON ME, BUT ON HIM THAT SENT ME. AND HE THAT SEETH ME. SEETH HIM THAT SENT ME"

reply to post by SOILDERSUNITEDFORCHRIST
You're just posting a list of verses. There is no actual argument you are making.
I really don't think believing in false gods is of any use. If I thought so, I would not be going to the trouble of posting trying to turn people to the god who can actually save us.
The old god we had to be freed from is an earth god gone bad. You're equating Jesus with that old god who Jesus came and lived and died to fee us from.