Question on Greek in Reve 12 and John 1

[LittleLambofJesus]

Hi. I noticed this greek word #4314 is used in both Reve 12:5 and John 1:1.
How is this word better defined into english? Thoughts?

Reve 12: 5.....the child of her toward/near the God and the throne of Him.

Reve 12:.......to <3588> [THE] teknon <5043> [CHILD] authV <846> {OF HER} proV <4314> [TOWARD] ton <3588> {THE} qeon <2316> {GOD} kai <2532> {AND} ton <3588> [THE] qronon <2362> [THRONE] autou <846> {OF HIM.}

John 1:1 In [the] beginning was the Word, and the Word was toward/near the God, and God was the Word;

John 1:1 | en <1722> {IN} arch <746> {BEGINNING} hn <2258> (5713) {WAS} o <3588> {THE} logoV <3056> {WORD,} kai <2532> {AND} o <3588> {THE} logoV <3056> {WORD} hn <2258> (5713) {WAS} proV <4314> [TOWARD] ton <3588> {THE} qeon <2316> {GOD,} kai <2532> {AND} qeoV <2316> {GOD} hn <2258> (5713) {WAS} o <3588> {THE} logoV <3056> {WORD.}

http://www.eliyah.com/lexicon.html

pros (Strong's 4314) occurs 725 times in 674 verses:

4314. pros pros a strengthened form of 4253; a preposition of direction; forward to, i.e. toward (with the genitive case, the side of, i.e. pertaining to; with the dative case, by the side of, i.e. near to; usually with the accusative case, the place, time, occasion, or respect, which is the destination of the relation, i.e. whither or for which it is predicated):--about, according to , against, among, at, because of, before, between, (where-)by, for, X at thy house, in, for intent, nigh unto, of, which pertain to, that, to (the end that), X together, to (you) -ward, unto, with(-in). In the comparative case, it denotes essentially the same applications, namely, motion towards, accession to, or nearness at.

4253. pro pro a primary preposition; "fore", i.e. in front of, prior (figuratively, superior) to:--above, ago, before, or ever. In the comparative, it retains the same significations

(Young) Daniel 7:13 `I was seeing in the visions of the night, and lo, with the clouds of the heavens as a son of man was [one] coming, and unto the Ancient of Days he hath come, and before Him they have brought him near.

 

[S Walch]

It's probably better to stranslate pros as "with" in John 1:1.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with(pros) God, and the Word was God

But then traslated as "to" or "unto" in Revelation 12:5

"And her child was seized to (Pros) God and to (pros) His throne"

 

[Radagast]

Hi. I noticed this greek word #4314 is used in both Reve 12:5 and John 1:1.
How is this word better defined into english? Thoughts?

Oooh. This is a tough one, because the meaning depends on case and context. Same for all Greek prepositions really.

The basic meaning when followed by "ton" is to or towards (as in Rev 12:5) but it also can mean close to or with (because if I move towards you, I'll be close to you) as in John 1:1.

 

[Radagast]

The basic meaning of towards when followed by "ton" is the top picture of a lion here: http://website.lineone.net/~ntgreek/f41-prep.html

 

[DreamerOfDreams]

I think translators in their desire to translate John 1:1 into a clone of Gen 1:1 removed the intended meaning from the verse.

For instance the Greek noun Arche does not have to be translated "beginning" though it often is. In some cases the word means things like "rulers" or "magestry."
The word "was" can also be translated variously according to the context.
Instead of the phase "In the beginning was the word" (or "The word was in the beggining") I like "The logos existed in the magestry"
The rest falls into place.

"The logosystem existed as a prototypical archetype.
This logosystem projected the divine.
This logosystem was the image of the divine."

 

[Radagast]

I think translators in their desire to translate John 1:1 into a clone of Gen 1:1 removed the intended meaning from the verse.

I don't think so. I think your translation is a little fanciful, to be honest.

For instance the Greek noun Arche does not have to be translated "beginning" though it often is. In some cases the word means things like "rulers" ...

I think you may be confusing Arche with Archon?

-- Radagast

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by DreamerOfDreams
I think translators in their desire to translate John 1:1 into a clone of Gen 1:1 removed the intended meaning from the verse.

How so
The first verse in Genesis is missing the article "the" as is John 1:1 and Revelation 1:1.

John 1:1 In [a] beginning was the Word, and the Word was toward/near the God, and God was the Word;

Revelation 1:1 [a/an] From/Un-Covering/Veiling[ apo-kaluyiV] Yeshuwa` Mashiyach, which gives to Him, the God/YHWH, to show to the bondservants of Him, which is behooving to be becoming in swiftness.

 

[D.W.Washburn]

I think translators in their desire to translate John 1:1 into a clone of Gen 1:1 removed the intended meaning from the verse.

For instance the Greek noun Arche does not have to be translated "beginning" though it often is. In some cases the word means things like "rulers" or "magestry."
The word "was" can also be translated variously according to the context.
Instead of the phase "In the beginning was the word" (or "The word was in the beggining") I like "The logos existed in the magestry"
The rest falls into place.

"The logosystem existed as a prototypical archetype.
This logosystem projected the divine.
This logosystem was the image of the divine."

Like Radagaast, I find your translation a little fanciful. Though, I will give you partial agreement. The word arche, usually translated "beginining" can carry the meaning of ruler. Bauer Arndt Gingrich Danker, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 2nd Edition, page 112 gives references).

The Greek root "arch-" connotes priority in time or rank.

But, the phrase "en arche" in John 1.1 is identical to the words used in the Septuagint at Genesis 1.1.

It's a pretty sure thing that John had Genesis 1.1 in mind as he wrote the Gospel.

 

[D.W.Washburn]

John 1:1 In [a] beginning was the Word, and the Word was toward/near the God, and God was the Word;

Just a quick note on the word order in the last part of this verse. While your translation is literally correct, it doesn't convey the meaning of the verse correctly. The phrase "kai theos en ho logos" is better translated "the Word was God."

Both "theos" and "logos" are in the nominative because "en" (eta nu) is an equative (or copulative verb). "theos" is recognized as the predicate of the sentence because it lacks the article. Likewise, "logos" is recognized as the subject because it has the article.

To translate the phrase as "God was the Word" gives the wrong impression in English because in English word order determines subject/predicate relationship.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Ok Thanks.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Oooh. This is a tough one, because the meaning depends on case and context. Same for all Greek prepositions really.

The basic meaning when followed by "ton" is to or towards (as in Rev 12:5) but it also can mean close to or with (because if I move towards you, I'll be close to you) as in John 1:1.

Wouldn't the greek word for "with" have been used instead of the word used for "toward/near"?
I really never looked at the distinction closely between those 2. Thanks for your post.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Someone brought up an interesting post on the GA board concerning this topic.

http://christianforums.com/t6555215-john-11.html

John 1:1


So, hisdaughter posted a website hosting an interlinear translation of the bible... so of course I ran straight for John 1:1, lol.

Always interested in translations...

So here's what it says:
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineI...NTpdf/joh1.pdf

Notice how literally translated it was "in beginning was the word and the word was toward the God and God was the word"

Notice (the word) was toward (the God), and God (not "the God") was the word.

Now, greeks used words MUCH more precisely than we do today.
A: the act of not using a definite article implies the indefinite article of "a god" instead of "The God" ... this much of a point is made quite often... however, I did notice something else (which I may be wrong about, and I'm sure I'm not the first to notice):

B: "It says theos emie ho logos"... not the other way around. Not "ho logos emie ho theos"... or even "ho logos emie theos"...

Monkeys are animals, but not all animals are monkies. Doesn't this suggest that "a divine being was the word" showing that he was more than a vibration, but the physical incarnation, and angelic (for lack of a better term) representation of God's will?

Similar to the idea of an angel of death... "an angel is death" but not "death is an angel." Two completely different connotations. Replacing "God" for "Angel" (for lack of a better term for "A divine being other than 'ho theos'" it would be:

"...and an angel is Logos."

Someone know more about greek than me? Is this sentance structure common? By saying "god was the word," is it interchangeable with "the word was ("not the") god?"

Preferably an atheist greek scholar, lol... I honestly don't want bias here... I'd rather KNOW I'm wrong than THINK I'm right incorrectly.... but I'd prefer to KNOW I'm right.

 

[D.W.Washburn]

LittleLamb:

The lack of a definite article in Greek does not always indicate that we should supply an indefinite article. For example the phrase "Holy Spirit" is often not given an article. This is because it was understood that there is only one Holy Spirit.

The verb "eimi" ("I am") is a copulative verb. This means that it connects two nouns both of which will be in the nominative case (theos en o logos--"en" being the third person singular imperfect of "eimi" "he, she, or it was"). The nominative case is used to indicate the subject of a sentence.

In English, word order is used to show the relationship of different parts of a sentence. In Greek, word order had more to do with emphasis.

So, if you have two nominative case nouns connected by a copulative verb, how do you know which one is the subject of the sentence? Those clever Greeks used an article to show which was the subject.

kai theos en ho logos = and the word was GOD. (I capitalized God in order to show the words emphasis in the sentence).

Despite Greek's alleged precision, the use of prepositions in the Koine Greek was particularly slippery. "Pros" has the general meaning of "toward" or "near" but had a wide range of meaning that included "with."

Hope that helps.

 

[greatnut]

Hi all

The thing with the prepositions like "pros" is that there are so many ways they can be translated. You have to see from the context which form of the preposition to choose. I think that in the KJV, Rev 12:5 and John 1:1 both have chosen the correct forms of the preposition.

Usage: AV - unto 340, to 203, with 43, for 25, against 24, among 20, at 11, not tr 6, misc 53, vr to 1; 726

 

[brinny]

Hi. I noticed this greek word #4314 is used in both Reve 12:5 and John 1:1.
How is this word better defined into english? Thoughts?

Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon

pros (Strong's 4314) occurs 725 times in 674 verses:

4314. pros pros a strengthened form of 4253; a preposition of direction; forward to, i.e. toward (with the genitive case, the side of, i.e. pertaining to; with the dative case, by the side of, i.e. near to; usually with the accusative case, the place, time, occasion, or respect, which is the destination of the relation, i.e. whither or for which it is predicated):--about, according to , against, among, at, because of, before, between, (where-)by, for, X at thy house, in, for intent, nigh unto, of, which pertain to, that, to (the end that), X together, to (you) -ward, unto, with(-in). In the comparative case, it denotes essentially the same applications, namely, motion towards, accession to, or nearness at.

4253. pro pro a primary preposition; "fore", i.e. in front of, prior (figuratively, superior) to:--above, ago, before, or ever. In the comparative, it retains the same significations

this verse is astounding:

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." ~John 1:1

It encapsulates the entire Bible in one verse......it boggles me mind.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

bump.......will come back to this later

 

[brinny]

yayyyyyy!!!

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

yayyyyyy!!!

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

bump.......will come back to this later

Okie doie.....I iz back

 

[YHWHis1]

LittleLamb:

The verb "eimi" ("I am") is a copulative verb. This means that it connects two nouns both of which will be in the nominative case (theos en o logos--"en" being the third person singular imperfect of "eimi" "he, she, or it was"). The nominative case is used to indicate the subject of a sentence.

In English, word order is used to show the relationship of different parts of a sentence. In Greek, word order had more to do with emphasis.

So, if you have two nominative case nouns connected by a copulative verb, how do you know which one is the subject of the sentence? Those clever Greeks used an article to show which was the subject.

kai theos en ho logos = and the word was GOD. (I capitalized God in order to show the words emphasis in the sentence).

Despite Greek's alleged precision, the use of prepositions in the Koine Greek was particularly slippery. "Pros" has the general meaning of "toward" or "near" but had a wide range of meaning that included "with."

Hope that helps.

I'm not quite sure I agree with LittleLamb.
Two nominatives do not always HAVE to reflect two different subjects, it could just indicate two different aspect of the same subject
I can see clearly that the subject of the sentence is "The Word". There can be no doubt in that, especially the way that John phrased his 3 part sentence:
1- At start, the Word was
2- toward The God, the Word was
3- god, the Word was.
There can be no doubt on the nominative there

And may I ask my good brother where is the emphasis in this?

God bless.