Exactly what does this verse mean?
"In the beginning was the word."
Ever
wonder which Bible version is the best? Believers certainly differ and
sometimes argue about it, but normally it’s conceded that no one
version is perfect. Despite the extraordinary care given to
preserving God's word over the centuries, every Bible version is but a
translation from the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts and necessarily
reflects the views of the translators. Normally this isn’t a problem
since God’s truth can most often be stated with some latitude, but
there are those difficult verses and passages, hard to understand and
often appearing contradictory, that force us to really dig for the
answer. In such cases, the King James Version proves invaluable since it
is a literal translation and is keyed to Strong’s concordance so we
can discover and understand the Hebrew and Greek words in question. Even
so, a problem still remains. The KJV, as well as other versions,
sometimes fails to hold true to the acknowledged accuracy of the
original manuscripts. Why? Because of pre-conceptions by the translators
who all have been biased by a Trinitarian view. This is not to criticize
the intent of
With respect to this, John M. Bland, in his work published on the Internet, There is One God, painstakingly examines relevant scriptures that show a Trinitarian bias. The reasons he advances, we feel, deserve our serious thought. As concisely as possible, we present them here.
First, Bland explains that the Greek manuscripts were “penned in ‘uncials’ (all capital letters) and possessed virtually no punctuation and no spaces between words, sentences and chapters. Therefore, even the chapter breaks, paragraphs, verse breakdown and numberings depend—to various degrees—upon the interpretation of the translator. Moreover, the translator must determine the capitalization. Bland uses as an example the Greek word pneuma that Strong’s dictionary defines as “a current of air, i.e. breath (blast) or a breeze; by analogy or figuratively, a spirit.” The word is used in a variety of ways. Jesus’ conversation with Nicodemus in John 3:8 comes to mind: “The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.” Both “wind” and “Spirit” are from the word pneuma . He notes that when we see the word capitalized as Spirit rather than as spirit, the translator’s Trinitarian theology is showing; otherwise, if translated all lower case, the word can take on an entirely different meaning.
Bland continues by noting that the meaning of a word is influenced by the context in which it is used. For example, the context of the word spirit can indicate different meanings, e.g., a person with “a haughty spirit,” or “the spirit of God,” or “the spirit of man.” Consequently, to interpret the context, the translator is forced to assume what must be a biased view. This is not a criticism of the translators; it is only an admission of a fact of life we live with.
Also, Bland notes that languages cannot always be understood on a “word-for-word” basis. The translator must often supply words to clarify the meaning, these often being italicized as in the KJV as you may have noticed. For instance, John 6:34—“For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.”—concludes with the words “unto him” for the sake of clarity.
Finally, Bland points out that many times, words in the manuscripts must be supplied with pronouns such as “he” or “it’.” The same is true of the definite article “the.” Once again, the translator must decide whether or not to supply such parts of speech, his decision necessarily affected by his theology. As an example, Bland calls attention to “the Holy Spirit” used in the four Gospels. He notes that most often there is no definite article in the original Greek, so the phrase would otherwise be translated simply “Holy Spirit” or if not capitalized, “holy spirit.” Yet our English versions translate it by adding a non-existent “the,” revealing the Trinitarian bias to regard the Holy Spirit as the third person of the Godhead.
What has been said must be factored in together with another problem. That is, words are sometimes wrongly translated apart from their normal use (as will be shown) to bear out the sense of the Trinitarian view. When all this is taken into account, certain passages can convey an entirely different slant. None better illustrates this than John 1:1-4, probably the most significant passage used to support the idea of the Trinity. Take a look at it below as it appears in the KJV with the key words crucial to the meaning followed by the Greek from which they were translated.
John 1: 1 In the beginning was the Word <logos>, and the Word <logos> was with <pros> God, and the Word <logos> was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with <pros> God.
3 All things were made <ginomai> by <dia> him; and without him was <ginomai> not any thing made <ginomai> that was made <ginomai>.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
The definitions of the original Greek words are enlightening. We make no claim to be linguists or expert in Greek, although Bland appears to be knowledgeable, so we encourage you to check Strong’s dictionary for the meanings in full, but for now we present them briefly as best we understand:
According to the meaning of logos in Strong's Dictionary: “Something said (including the thought); by implication, a topic (subject or discourse).”
Since this is so, need the Word (logos) be limited solely to Christ? Might it not speak in a broader sense to all of God's revealed truth declared from Genesis to Revelation? Should it not include His complete revelation of Himself, of the purpose of His creation, of all the history and prophecies preceding Christ and all that would follow? Was it not what was in His mind from the beginning and what He who knew the end from the beginning would declare?
Read Proverbs 8 where the mindset of God is personified as wisdom. The word logos is used in a wide variety of ways, so we do well to study its meaning. First, the phrase, "Word of God," appears repeatedly in the KJV throughout the New Testament, almost always translated from the words, "logos" and "theos." It is used only four times in the Old Testament, first in I Samuel 9:27 where the prophet requested Saul to, "stand thou still a while, that I may shew thee the word of God." We might ask if he presented the gospel or more specific instructions for the king.
However, most often (over 400 times), in the Old Testament, we see God making His will known to the prophets and others by the phrase, "thus saith the LORD." By such expressions, God can be seen unfolding His will progressively in accord with Hebrews 1:1, "God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets. has in these last days spoken to us by His Son," This being true, when we read in John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word," should we not be exceedingly careful about what is meant? Note that it is not until John 1:14 that we read, "the Word [Logos] became flesh," embodying through the life of Christ the personalized expression of God's plan and message.
Having mentioned all this, now take a second look at John 1:1-4. The passage translates quite differently when the Greek words first noted above are applied without preconceived Trinitarian bias.
pros: “A preposition of direction;
forward to, i.e. toward”
As opposed to “pros” the Greek word “meta” would more accurately
convey the meaning generally understood as “being along side.”
Instead, “pros” carries the idea of “with regard to” or
“pertaining to.”
dia:“Denoting the channel of an act; through”
Many times this word, even when applying to Christ, is rendered “through”; it seems
strange that is isn’t so translated here.
ginomai:
“To cause to be; to become (come into being);…to come to pass”
Appearing four times in verse 3, it is translated as “made” rather
than simply to come into existence through Christ, who the word “dia”
implies was the channel God used.
If we free ourselves from preconceptions, if we keep these definitions in mind together with what has been mentioned about capitalization, the use of pronouns appropriate to the gender of the subject, the use or non-use of the definite article, observing other rules of grammar, and remember the need to read in context, the sense of the passage becomes enlightening.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the plan, and the plan was with regard to God, and the plan was God [that is, the plan originated with God, was about Him, and was consummated in Him.]
2 The same was in the beginning with regard to God.
3 All things came to pass through it; and without it not any thing came to pass that came into being.
4 In it was life; and the life was the light of men.
What a change a few words can make by taking them at face value without bias! We can see the passage is in harmony with God’s foreordained will and purpose to secure our redemption and glorify His name. Before the heavens and the earth were created, He decreed every step in how He would progressively reveal Himself from Genesis through Revelation, from Eden through the Millennium to the Day of God. Here we see the relevance of His words in Isaiah 46:10 ”Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure.”
Study this passage carefully, bearing in mind all that has been said. Notice the difference when the word logos is translated in the sense of God’s intention or plan rather than limited to the person of Christ at his first advent. Don’t overlook that the use of the pronoun, “him,” is rightfully changed to “it” because the subject is not a person but of a neuter gender. Also, we see that Christ was not the original Creator, as implied. No, as the one by whom God would make Himself know be the channel through whom God brought all things to pass. This is made clear by the proper translation of “dia” meaning “through” and “ginomai” rendered in the sense of “becoming, or coming to pass.”
Are we putting our own spin on the passage? How? It is true to both the Greek words and correct grammar. But don’t take our word for it. Study it out for yourself.