Was the "Word" (According to the Gospel of John) "Made Flesh"?

reply to post by Akragon

See thats where i find error... especially when it comes to "new converts" who don't actually understand certian concepts... i find that leading "those that do not know" astray...

This is what you might call, a preexisting condition, meaning this is what is generally taught, already, and not something I invented but what has been dogma for so many centuries.
If you want to fix it, you have your approach, and I have mine.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Akragon

 

See thats where i find error... especially when it comes to "new converts" who don't actually understand certian concepts... i find that leading "those that do not know" astray...

This is what you might call, a preexisting condition, meaning this is what is generally taught, already, and not something I invented but what has been dogma for so many centuries.
If you want to fix it, you have your approach, and I have mine.

Well i wouldn't say i want to fix it... not being christian i don't attempt to convert anyone anyways...

People are generally satisfied with calling Jesus God... *shrug* who am i to stop them... but i can show them otherwise... then its up to that person to see it or not...

reply to post by DISRAELI

Yes, I can see it would be a big task to bring in the other forms.
What might be useful from that lexicon is other examples of the subject-become-predicate combination.
E.g. the first one that catches my eye is Satan's comment about the stones being commanded to become bread.

My point is that the words diverged and became specialized in their usage that it becomes irrelevant that they are derived from the same root.
The verses you brought up about turning stones into loaves of bread use a different word.
This is my point because you would have to show one use of the word, egeneto, where it describes a similar transformation, to show that it is valid to go by another, related word, to bring out an otherwise unique meaning to create a particular reading.

reply to post by jmdewey60

It is a different word-form only because it has a different function in the sentence; in Satan's comment, it is not an event in the past.
It is comparable to the difference in English between "became" and "might become". I think we can legitimately compare examples of the same verb being used in different tenses.

However, that is only one example. I am not suggesting that John's "became" works in the same way.
There seem to be at least two possible ways of interpreting "subject becomes predicate".
One is that the new state replaces the preceding state, as in "stones become bread".
Another is that the new state supplements the preceding state- I've already put this forward as a possible understanding of "Word became flesh".

reply to post by DISRAELI


My point, which I don't know what to do, other than to repeat, is that if you have 200 verses with egeneto in them, with at least two so far I have found where it is in there twice in one verse, then you should, I would think, be able to find one, other than the one in John 1:14, that shows it being used in that way.
I think there are examples in English, if I looked, where you have a similar situation where in some dim, long ago past they were closely related, but through usage they have become words in their own right, which seems to be the case with egeneto, to where drawing on other words based on a common root is, on a practical level, irrelevant and proves nothing.

Mark 4:4 And as he sowed, some seed fell on the path, and the birds came and ate it up. (the implication is given by the use of egeneto that a condition came about that someone was sowing, the understood circumstance being the season for sowing)

Mark 4:10 When he was alone, those who were around him along with the twelve asked him about the parables. (the implication is given by the use of egeneto that a condition came about that people were asking questions, caused by the circumstance of their being in a private setting)

Mark 4:22 For there is nothing hidden, except to be disclosed; nor is anything secret, except to come to light. (the implication is given by the use of egeneto that a condition came about that something is hidden, caused by the circumstance of their eventualy coming about a revelation)

Mark 4:39 He woke up and rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, "Peace! Be still!" Then the wind ceased, and there was a dead calm. (the implication is given by the use of egeneto that a condition came about that the sea was calm, caused by the circumstance of the wind ceasing to blow)

Mark 5:16 Those who had seen what had happened to the demoniac and to the swine reported it. (the implication of a change in condition supplied by the use of the word, egeneto, with the circumstances included in the story, which is described in the preceding verses, which was the actions of Jesus)

Mark 6:14 King Herod heard of it, for Jesus’ name had become known. Some were saying, “John the baptizer has been raised from the dead; and for this reason these powers are at work in him.” (the implication is given by the use of egeneto that a condition came about that the name of Jesus was known, where the earlier condition was that the name of Jesus was not known, with the change caused by the circumstance of the people talking about him)

Mark 9:3 (see my comment on Mathew 17:2 )

Mark 9:7 x2 Then a cloud overshadowed them, and from the cloud there came a voice, "This is my Son, the Beloved; listen to him!" (here egeneto is used to convey the concept that there was no cloud, earlier, and then, later, there was a cloud. egeneto is used twice, where the second instance describes the concept that there earlier not a voice, and then, later, there was a voice)

Mark 9:26 After crying out and convulsing him terribly, it came out, and the boy was like a corpse, so that most of them said, "He is dead." (the implication is given by the use of egeneto that a condition came about that the boy was "like a corpse", caused by the circumstance of the unclean spirit coming out of him)

Mark 11:19 And when evening came, Jesus and his disciples went out of the city.

Mark 12:11 (see my comment on Mathew 21:42)
Mark 15:33 (see my comment on Mathew 27:45)
Luke 1:5 (see my comment on Mark 1:9)
Luke 1:8 (see above)
Luke 1:23 (see my comment on Mathew 26:1)
Luke 1:41 (see above)

Luke 1:44 For as soon as I heard the sound of your greeting, the child in my womb leaped for joy. (the concept is conveyed, by the insertion of the word egeneto, that earlier she did not hear a greeting, but later, she did hear a greeting, caused by the other person speaking, where earlier they were not speaking)

Luke 1:59 On the eighth day they came to circumcise the child, and they were going to name him Zechariah after his father. (they did not circumcise the child on the seventh or the nineth day since that was not was prescribed by the law, so the condition on that particular day was changed by the circumstance that it coencided by a determination made by an earlier written instruction which could apply to any day, depending on when that particular person was born.)

This is making my head hurt.
I think I have examples already which demonstrate all the ways egeneto is used in the NT.
If anyone knows a verse that uses the word in a way which is not covered already, let me know.
But the point of this is that this word is usually not directly translated but is just jammed in there to convey a way to understand the other words in the sentence, that a condition changes because of different circumstances which includes even just the will of God, or something written in the OT.

Logos
What I want to present are examples from the New Testament where you find the word, logos, followed by a noun (or pronoun), which is what we find in the verse which is the subject of this thread.
Matthew 5:37 word you - Let your word be ‘Yes, Yes’ or ‘No, No’; . . .
Matthew 28:15 word this - . . . And this story is still told among the Jews to this day.
Luke 4:32 word his - . . . because he spoke with authority.
Luke 4:36 word this - . . . What kind of utterance is this? . . .
Luke 7:17 word this - This word about him spread throughout Judea . . .
Luke 8:11 word God - Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.
John 6:60 word this - . . . they said, "This teaching is difficult; who can accept it?
John 7:36 word this - What does he mean by saying, ‘You will search for me . . .
John 8:37 word my - . . . because there is no place in you for my word.
John 10:35 word God - If those to whom the word of God came were called ‘gods’ . . .
John 12:38 word Isaiah - This was to fulfill the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah; . . .
John 14:24 word me - . . . and the word that you hear is not mine, but is from the Father who sent me.
John 17:17 word your - Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.
John 18:32 word Jesus - (This was to fulfill what Jesus had said when he indicated the kind of . . .
Acts 6:7 word God - The word of God continued to spread; . . .
Acts 12:24 word God - But the word of God continued to advance and gain adherents.
Acts 13:15 word exhortation - . . . "Brothers, if you have any word of exhortation for the people, give it."
Acts 13:26 word salvation - . . . to you the word of this salvation has been sent.
Acts 13:49 word Lord - Thus the word of the Lord spread throughout the region.
Acts 17:13 word God - . . . learned that the word of God had been proclaimed by Paul in Beroea . . .
Romans 9:6 word God - It is not as though the word of God had failed. . . .
Romans 9:9 word this - For this is what the promise said, "About this time . . .
1 Corinthians 2:4 word me - And my speech . . .
1 Corinthians 12:8 word wisdom - . . . the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge . . .
1 Corinthians 12:8 word knowledge - . . . the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge . . .
1 Corinthians 14:36 word God - Or did the word of God originate with you? . . .
2 Corinthians 1:18 word us - . . . our word to you has not been "Yes and No."
Colossians 3:16 word Christ - Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly; . . .
Colossians 4:6 word you - Let your speech always be gracious, . . .
1 Thessalonians 1:8 word Lord - For the word of the Lord has sounded forth from you . . .
2 Thessalonians 3:1 word Lord -. . . pray for us, so that the word of the Lord may spread rapidly . . .
2 Timothy 2:9 word God - . . . But the word of God is not chained.
2 Timothy 2:17 word them - and their talk will spread like gangrene. . .
Titus 2:5 word God - . . . so that the word of God may not be discredited.
Hebrews 4:2 word the report - . . . but the word which they heard did not profit them . . .
Hebrews 4:12 word God - Indeed, the word of God is living and active, . . .
1 John 1:10 word him - . . . and his word is not in us.
1 John 2:14 word God - . . . you are strong and the word of God abides in you, . . .
Revelation 19:13 word God - . . . and his name is called The Word of God.

reply to post by jmdewey60

Let me make some observations based on your examples.
They seem to fall into three or four different categories in terms of sentence structure, and the sentence structure makes a big difference to the translation.

First there is "Noun EGENETO". The new circumstance is that something has come into existence which was not there before. It might be a storm, it might be a great darkness, it might be a new sabbath or the Sabbath itself. English translations might turn this round and say "there came".

Then there is the idiom, especially found in Mark, where there is no subject attached to the verb. There is simply EGENETO, followed usually by "that"" and the description of the new circumstances. The standard AV translation is "It came to pass" (English usage cannot cope with having no subject, and needs to import an impersonal one like "it").

Next there is "Noun EGENETO adjective". Clothing becomes white. A name becomes well-known. The new circumstance here is the the subject has received a new quality which it did not have before.

Finally there is "Noun EGENETO Noun". This is the most interesting category, because it matches most closely the verse you're examining.
The only instance among the examples you've quoted is the stone which EGENETO the head of the corner.
Two points worth noting;
a) In becoming head of the corner, the stone does not cease to be a stone.
b) The new circumstance is that the stone has received a new quality which it did not have before.
If we call this "honour", it was previously "without-honour" and is now "with-honour".
I think this has a bearing.
It could be worth tracking down other examples of the two-noun situation.

P.S. Where there is a predicate, whether noun or adjective, the verb normally gets translated as "became".
But if there is no predicate, a literal translation makes very clumsy English- "A storm became" or "It became that..."- so translators have always tended to turn these sentences round in ways that suit English usage better.

reply to post by DISRAELI

It could be worth tracking down other examples of the two-noun situation.

You make some good observations and a good case for making a supplemental list of the verses of the noun egeneto noun" variety.
I am simultaneously making a list on a blog page readingthebibleingreek.blog.com... where you can see the entire list (as much as I have done), complete, in one spot, and can scroll up and down it. This is the purpose of my blog, which is to make lists and links between items in different lists.

Luke 3:2 during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness.

In the above verse you have N G(egeneto) N construct, where the N's are, Caiaphas, and, God.

Luke 6:16 and Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.

The above verse is a straight, word for word translation from the Greek, in the same word order and everything. Judas did not become a traitor at this time, which was when he was chosen to be a disciple, but it was talking about a condition Judas would assume at some certain future point by betraying Jesus for money. So the circumstance which caused this change in the condition of Judas was caused by the circumstance of him kissing Jesus to point out his identity to those looking for him.

Luke 6:49 But the one who hears and does not act is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. When the river burst against it, immediately it fell, and great was the ruin of that house."

In the above verse, the condition changes for the house, where earlier it is standing, and later, it is destroyed (not standing) where the change in circumstance is a flood, where earlier there was no flood.

Luke 9:29 And while he was praying, the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became dazzling white.

Here it seems to be saying that a change in condition came about, where earlier, Jesus looked normal, then, later, he looks different, so the condition that changed was his appearance. The change in circumstance has to be the two men talking to him, in the next verse, who had this type of appearance also. So because of their closeness to them, he became like them because of some special power surrounding the two, and then, the three.
The actual placement for egeneto is right at the beginning of the verse, where it is saying, "And it came about as he was praying" where it is the "it came about" part, and is basically saying, "it so happened, that . . . ", and not mixed in with the details describing what happened.

Luke 11:30 For just as Jonah became a sign to the people of Nineveh, so the Son of Man will be to this generation.

"a sign, prodigy, portent, i.e. an unusual occurrence, transcending the common course of nature" being a good fitting definition, so in the circumstance of The Lord willing that the people of Nineveh be warned, Jonah takes on the condition of a portent, meaning the people looking at him are receiving the warning through his behavior.

Luke 13:19 It is like a mustard seed that someone took and sowed in the garden; it grew and became a tree, and the birds of the air made nests in its branches."

Here seems to be a change in condition brought about by growing, where at the point where birds are building nests in its branches it become clear that it is now a tree. The change in circumstances are the strength of its branches, which changes its condition from: not a tree, to being a tree.

Luke 22:44 In his anguish he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling down on the ground.

You can just as well translate the verse without directly translating the word, egeneto by writing it as “. . . and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground.” where egeneto is conveying that this condition came about, where earlier the condition was that there were not these drops of sweat falling like drops of blood.

Luke 24:31 Then their eyes were opened, and they recognized him; and he vanished from their sight.

Here egeneto is not directly translated but its presence lends the feeling or understanding that in the close to present past, Jesus was visible, then slightly later, in the now present, he was not visible, and so there was a change in the condition of Jesus' visibility, owing to a supposed circumstance that Jesus' very nature had become different after his resurrection.

Im afraid three of your first four examples are not quite what i meant, because the second noun isn't really the predicate of the first noun.

In Luke ch3 v2, the literal translation would be "The word-of-God became...", without any real predicate, and the mention of Caiaphas just identifies the time when it happens. This is an example of my first category, "Noun EGENETO".

Similarly in ch6 49 "A great ruin became..."

Ch9 v29 is an example of my second category, EGENETO without a subject, followed by a description of the situation.

Luke 6:16 and Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.

However, this one fits the pattern exactly. "Became" links together "Judas" and "traitor".
In your next post, you quote Jonah becoming a sign, which is another good example.
In both cases, they "become" something by gaining new qualities in addition to those they had before.

Incidentally, the fact that the Judas verse is among the EGENETO examples highlights the way the gospels were written in popular, simple speech. EGENETO is a simple past tense, but the thought in the verse has really got a future element- Judas would become a traitor, or eventually became a traitor. Anyone who was a stickler for grammatical accuracy would have chosen a different tense to reflect that.

reply to post by DISRAELI

I was just going down the list, in order and picking out ones that did not just mean, "and it came to pass".
Apparently the ones that look interesting to you are the ones where you have egeneto translated as "became".
So I should post more of those.
Here is the next one to come up as I go down my list of 200 verses that have the word, egeneto, in them.

Acts 1:19 This became known to all the residents of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their language Hakeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)

Where the manner of Judas' death was not previously known, then it became known, probably caused by the circumstance of people talking about it.

reply to post by jmdewey60

Actually, it was more about sentence structure than about the way the way the word is translated.
However, that nearly comes to the same thing, because the sentences where EGENETO doesn't follow the Noun-Verb-Predicate pattern are precisely the ones which look clumsy and un-English if the "became" is translated literally, so that's when translators turn the sentence round in some way.

Here is something a little odd I found on a blog:

It is also true that EGENETO functions as 3d sg. aorist for EIMI, which has no aorist, so that EGENETO means "came into being" as well as "was born" whereas HN simply denotes that someone/something "was in existence" at a referenced point of time in the past.

EGENETO
Past tense of "I Am"? As in . . I Was?

The author of this blog goes on to say he believes the use of egeneto in verse 14 is
a deliberate contrast to verse 6

egeneto anthrōpos apestalmenos para theou onoma autō iōannēs

C. Kingsley Barrett, in The Gospel according to St. John, Second Edition: An Introduction With Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text seems to agree with that idea that verses 6 and 14 are a compare and contrast set in opposition to each other, where both "appear" as described by the word egeneto, where the first is a man and the messenger, and the second is the Word itself to man.

reply to post by jmdewey60

Even on that translation there is still the apposition of LOGOS and SARX to account for.
"The Word (as flesh) appeared"?
"The Word appeared in fleshly form"?
The fact that Barrett is comparing it with the "appearance" of John shows that he doesn't mean "appeared" in the sense of being an illusion. He is understanding it as "arrived".

I own nothing more recent than Westcott, who draws attention to the phrase in 1 John 4v2 about Christ coming "in flesh" (EN SARKI).
Oh yes, even more relevantly, he brings up v3 of this same gospel chapter;
"All things EGENETO through him, and without him EGENETO nothing that was made"

reply to post by DISRAELI


I don't even have the most basic list made yet, of just all verses that have egeneto in it.
Once I have that, I can make smaller lists, where I can break them down into groups.
So I'm not trying to come to a conclusion on any of this right now.
Just recording some interesting things i found on the subject.

Rather than trying to learn all about the Greek writing style and language from the period of the New Testament, why not look at the position of the early church on these subtleties? After all, this was their native language, so they would know better than anybody 2000 years later what the authors meant. The only problem with this approach would be if the early church was biased, but in that case the New Testament itself would be biased too.

reply to post by cloudyday

. . . why not look at the position of the early church on these . . . they would know better than anybody 2000 years later what the authors meant.

The best thing, to me, would be to look at 1 John 1, which I think was written after the church was well underway.

This is what we proclaim to you: what was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and our hands have touched (concerning the word of life – and the life was revealed, and we have seen and testify and announce to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was revealed to us). What we have seen and heard we announce to you too, so that you may have fellowship with us (and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ). Thus we are writing these things so that our joy may be complete.

Now this is the gospel message we have heard from him and announce to you: God is light, and in him there is no darkness at all. If we say we have fellowship with him and yet keep on walking in the darkness, we are lying and not practicing the truth. But if we walk in the light as he himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.

The writer of First John says that word of life, and the life was revealed. Jesus said (among other things) that he is the life. This is something you could also get from the last supper where Jesus explained that he, bodily, was, literally, our life. It looks like to me the writer is saying "we were with the life (Jesus), and the word", which was the Gospel, the news of the kingdom of God, which is what God decided on for what Jesus would say, as a direct prompting from God, the Word in flesh, with Jesus being that flesh.
In the next paragraph, the writer explains that the light, which is equated with the Word, in the Gospel of John, chapter 1, is God.