John 1:1

1. Grammar of John 1:1

  • The second use of theos (“the Word was God”) lacks the definite article (it is anarthrous).

  • In Greek, this construction is qualitative, meaning “the Word was divine” rather than “the Word was the God (of Israel).”


2. Contemporary Understanding in the 1st Century

  • In the late 1st century CE, “divinity” could be participated in without making someone identical to the one true God.

  • Saying the Word is theos without the article meant “divine,” not “the very God of Israel.”


3. Philo’s Writings

  • Jewish philosopher Philo explicitly said:

    • Only God with the article (ho theos) is the true God of Israel.

    • Others (like the Logos) can be called theos without the article, meaning they share in divinity but are not the Most High God.

  • Philo even calls the Logos a “second god.”


4. Parallel in John 10

  • Jesus’ opponents accuse him: “You, being a man (anthropos, anarthrous), make yourself theos (without the article).”

  • Proper translation: “You make yourself divine,” not “You make yourself God.”

  • The same qualitative grammar shows theosthe God of Israel.


5. Early Christian Writers Noticed This

  • Origen (3rd century): Commented that John omits the article for the Logos, showing Jesus is not the true God, but shares in divinity.

  • Justin Martyr (2nd century): Used theos without the article for the Logos, but with the article for “the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.”

  • This shows a consistent interpretive tradition: the Logos is divine but not identical with the God of Israel.


6. Broader Implication

  • According to John’s Gospel, this divinization (sharing in God’s life) is extended to Jesus’ followers too: just as Jesus is one with God, his disciples also can become one with God and share in divinity.

  • Thus, the Logos being “divine” is about participation in God’s nature, not identity with God.


Conclusion

John 1:1 should be translated as:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was divine.”

The grammar, contemporary Jewish/Christian thought, and early church interpretations all support this — the Logos shares in divinity but is not the same being as the one true God.

Last updated