Conduct a deep historical, etymological, and theological analysis of the KJV bible passage: John 1:1-3. Outline the results.
A Deep Analysis of John 1:1-3 in the King James Version
I. Introduction
The Gospel of John holds a unique position within the New Testament canon, distinguished by its thematic depth and theological focus, setting it apart from the synoptic accounts of Matthew, Mark, and Luke 1. While sharing the overarching narrative of Jesus Christ's life and ministry, John's Gospel delves into profound theological truths concerning the identity and nature of Christ from its very inception. The opening verses, John 1:1-3, stand as a cornerstone of Christian theology, offering a powerful and concise statement about the pre-existence, divinity, and creative role of the Word, understood by Christians to be Jesus Christ 1. This report aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of this foundational passage as it appears in the King James Version (KJV), exploring its historical context, the source texts utilized for its translation, a detailed etymological examination of its key terms, and a survey of its theological interpretations throughout Christian history.
II. The Historical Context of the King James Version Translation
The King James Version of the Bible emerged from a specific confluence of religious and political circumstances in early 17th century England 2. The reign of King James I was marked by a complex religious landscape, with the established Church of England navigating tensions between a significant Roman Catholic minority and a growing Puritan movement advocating for further reformation 2. This period witnessed an increasing demand among Protestants for access to the scriptures in the vernacular, a direct consequence of the Reformation's emphasis on the principle of sola scriptura, the belief that scripture alone is the ultimate authority in matters of faith, a principle championed by key figures like Martin Luther and John Calvin in the preceding century 2.
Prior to the commissioning of the KJV, a number of English Bible translations had already been produced, each playing a crucial role in the development of English biblical scholarship 2. These included John Wycliffe's translation in the late 14th century, William Tyndale's groundbreaking New Testament in 1526 (which notably drew upon the original Greek texts), the Coverdale Bible of 1535, the Great Bible authorized by King Henry VIII in 1538, the Geneva Bible published in 1560 (popular among Protestants and featuring Calvinistic theological notes), and the Bishops' Bible of 1568, which was the officially sanctioned version within the Church of England 2. The KJV was not conceived as an entirely new translation but rather as a revision and synthesis of these preceding works, aiming to create a more accurate and universally acceptable English Bible 2.
King James I, upon his ascension to the English throne in 1603, sought to unify his kingdom, which was marked by significant religious divisions 2. Recognizing the potential for a unified Bible to serve as a tool for both religious and political cohesion, he responded to a growing desire for a new translation 4. This desire was significantly amplified by Puritan concerns regarding perceived inaccuracies and limitations in existing English Bibles, particularly the Bishops' Bible and the Geneva Bible 2. The Puritans articulated these concerns in the Millenary Petition presented to the king, highlighting specific passages they believed were mistranslated (such as Galatians 4:25) and objecting to the Calvinistic marginal notes found in the popular Geneva Bible, which King James himself viewed with suspicion due to their potential to challenge the authority of the monarchy 3.
In 1604, King James convened the Hampton Court Conference to address these religious tensions and consider the Puritan demands 2. The conference brought together prominent churchmen, bishops, and Puritan leaders, including figures like John Rainolds and Laurence Chaderton, for discussions spanning church doctrine, liturgical practices, and matters of church governance 2. While King James ultimately rejected most of the Puritans' proposals for radical reforms within the Church of England, he did concede to their request for a new translation of the Bible 12. This decision was partly motivated by the king's desire to establish his own authority in religious matters and to produce a version of the Bible that would be acceptable to a broader range of English speakers, thus promoting unity within the realm 4.
King James provided specific instructions to the translators to guide their work 3. These instructions included the directive that the Bishops' Bible should serve as the primary textual basis, that traditional ecclesiastical terms should be retained, that no marginal notes offering interpretations should be included (a direct response to the Geneva Bible's notes), and that earlier translations such as Tyndale's should be consulted when deemed appropriate 3. These guidelines reveal the king's intention to produce a Bible that not only aimed for accuracy but also reinforced the established religious and political order, carefully controlling the interpretive framework by prohibiting potentially dissenting marginalia 3.
The translation process, which commenced shortly after the Hampton Court Conference and culminated in the publication of the King James Bible in 1611, was a monumental scholarly undertaking 2. King James appointed six committees of translators, comprising approximately 47 to 54 scholars renowned for their expertise in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin 2. These committees were strategically located at Westminster, Oxford, and Cambridge, each assigned specific books of the Bible to translate 2. The process was collaborative, with individual committees producing initial translations that were then subjected to rigorous review by other scholars, involving discussions, revisions, and a commitment to reaching a consensus on the most accurate and appropriate renderings 2. The translators were also instructed to draw upon the rich legacy of previous English translations, including the works of Tyndale, Coverdale, and others, as well as to consult the best available original language texts and scholarly resources, including Jewish commentaries for the Old Testament 2. This collaborative and scholarly approach underscores the intention to create a translation that built upon the strengths of its predecessors while striving for even greater fidelity to the original scriptures 2.
Despite its royal authorization, the King James Version did not achieve immediate widespread popularity 2. For several decades, the Geneva Bible, with its familiar translation and theological notes, remained the preferred choice among many English readers, particularly the Puritans who harbored initial skepticism towards a translation commissioned by the Crown 2. However, the KJV gradually gained prominence, eventually replacing the Bishops' Bible as the standard for public worship within the Church of England. By the mid-17th century, the King James Version had become the dominant English Bible, a position it held for centuries, exerting a profound and lasting influence on the English language, literary style, and the development of English-speaking Protestantism 3. Its impact was so significant that even English Roman Catholics came to widely accept it, and later revisions of their own Douai-Rheims Bible drew heavily upon the KJV 5. Even in contemporary times, the King James Version remains the favored translation for certain Christian groups and is widely recognized as a literary masterpiece of early modern England 5.
III. Source Texts for the Gospel of John in the KJV
The New Testament of the King James Version, including the Gospel of John, was primarily translated from a collection of 16th-century printed Greek texts known collectively as the Textus Receptus, which translates from Latin as "Received Text" 3. It is crucial to understand that the Textus Receptus is not a single, ancient manuscript but rather a succession of printed editions of the Greek New Testament that emerged in the early years of the printing press 16. The formal designation "Textus Receptus" was first used in the preface to the 1633 edition published by the Elzevir brothers, but the term is retrospectively applied to earlier editions that share the same underlying Byzantine textual tradition 17.
A pivotal figure in the development of the Textus Receptus was Desiderius Erasmus, a renowned Dutch scholar, who published the first printed edition of the Greek New Testament in 1516, titled Novum Instrumentum omne 16. Driven by the urgency to be the first to publish such a work, Erasmus compiled his text rapidly, relying on a limited number of late medieval Greek manuscripts, primarily minuscule manuscripts dating from the 12th to the 15th centuries, which were available to him in Basel 16. Notably, Erasmus did not possess a complete manuscript of the Book of Revelation and was compelled to back-translate the final six verses from the Latin Vulgate into Greek to complete his edition 16.
Subsequent editions of the Greek New Testament built upon Erasmus's foundation. Robert Estienne (Stephanus), a scholar from Paris, produced several influential editions throughout the mid-16th century 16. His 1551 edition was particularly significant as it was the first to include verse divisions, a feature that became standard in later Bibles 16. Stephanus had access to a broader range of Greek manuscripts than Erasmus, including Codex Bezae and Codex L, and he also consulted the Complutensian Polyglot, an early printed edition of the Bible produced in Spain 16.
The edition of the Textus Receptus most directly influential on the King James translators, particularly for the New Testament including the Gospel of John, was that of Theodore Beza, a successor to John Calvin 16. Beza published several editions of the Greek New Testament, with his 1588-89 and 1598 editions likely serving as the primary source text for the KJV translators 16. Beza had access to the important Codex Bezae (a 5th or 6th century bilingual manuscript containing much of the Gospels and Acts) and Codex Claromontanus (a 6th century manuscript of Paul's epistles), though scholarly consensus suggests he utilized these older manuscripts rather sparingly, with his text largely aligning with the earlier editions of Stephanus and Erasmus 16.
It is important to note that modern biblical scholarship and translation efforts often rely on critical editions of the Greek New Testament, such as the Nestle-Aland and United Bible Societies (UBS) editions 21. These critical texts are based on a much wider array of manuscript evidence, including earlier and more complete codices like Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, both dating to the 4th century, which were not available to the scholars who compiled the Textus Receptus and the translators of the King James Version 21. As a result, modern translations may differ from the KJV in certain textual readings due to their reliance on this broader and earlier manuscript base, reflecting the ongoing nature of textual criticism and the pursuit of the most accurate representation of the original New Testament text 22. Despite these differences, it is generally acknowledged that there is a substantial degree of agreement, estimated at around 95-98%, between the Textus Receptus and these modern critical Greek texts 26.
IV. Etymological Analysis of Key Words in John 1:1-3
To gain a deeper understanding of John 1:1-3 in the King James Version, it is essential to examine the original Greek words from the Textus Receptus that underlie the English translation. The following table presents the key words from the KJV passage and their corresponding Greek terms, along with their grammatical forms:
The preposition Ἐν (En) primarily signifies location "in" but can also denote time, such as "in" or "during" 27. It is a common preposition found throughout the Greek New Testament and classical Greek literature.
ἀρχῇ (Archē), translated as "beginning," carries a broader meaning encompassing "origin," "first principle," and can even refer to authority or rule 27. Its use here directly echoes the opening of Genesis 1:1 in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament), establishing a deliberate parallel between the creation of the cosmos and the introduction of the Logos in John's Gospel 30. This connection suggests the involvement of the Logos from the very inception of existence.
The verb ἦν (Ēn) is the imperfect tense of εἰμί (eimi), meaning "was" or "existed" 27. The imperfect tense in Greek typically denotes a continuous state or an ongoing action in the past. In this context, it emphasizes the pre-existence of the Logos before the act of creation, indicating a state of being that precedes the temporal beginning 31.
ὁ λόγος (Ho Logos), translated as "the Word," is a multifaceted term with a rich philosophical and religious history 27. Etymologically linked to the Greek verb λέγω (legō, "to speak"), logos encompasses meanings such as "word," "speech," "discourse," "reason," "logic," "account," and "computation." In Greek philosophy, particularly in Stoicism, Logos referred to the divine reason or principle that orders and governs the universe 29. In Jewish thought, the "word" (dabar) of God was often personified as the instrument of divine action, especially in creation and revelation, and the concept of Wisdom (Sophia) in the Old Testament shares similar characteristics 31. John's use of Logos strategically draws upon both these intellectual traditions, presenting Jesus as the divine Word through whom God created the universe and reveals himself to humanity 29. The presence of the definite article (ὁ) before logos in the first two occurrences is significant, indicating a specific entity.
The third occurrence of λόγος (Logos) in verse 1, in the clause "καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος" (and the Word was God), lacks the definite article before θεὸς. This grammatical distinction is a crucial point of theological discussion, debated in terms of whether it signifies that the Word is fully and identically God or possesses the nature or characteristics of God 32.
The preposition πρὸς (Pros), translated as "with," carries a range of meanings including "with," "towards," "face to face with," indicating proximity, interaction, or orientation 32. In the phrase "ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν" (was with God), it suggests a close relationship and a distinction in personhood between the Logos and God 32. It implies that the Logos is not simply identical to God but exists in relation to Him.
τὸν θεόν (Ton Theon) is the accusative singular form of ὁ θεός (ho theos), meaning "the God" 42. The presence of the definite article points to a specific being, generally understood within Christian theology as God the Father. In this context, it functions as the object of the preposition pros.
The second occurrence of θεὸς (Theos) in verse 1, without the definite article in the clause "καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος" (and the Word was God), is a key point of theological debate 32. Some scholars interpret this grammatically as indicating that the Word shares the divine nature or essence of God (a qualitative understanding), while others argue it refers to the full deity of the Logos. The absence of the article distinguishes it from the first mention of "God" (τὸν θεόν) which has the article and typically refers to God the Father.
πάντα (Panta), translated as "all things," is the neuter plural form of πᾶς (pas), meaning "all" or "every," indicating totality without exception 33. Its use emphasizes the comprehensive scope of the Logos's involvement in creation.
δι' αὐτοῦ (Di' Autou), translated as "by him" in the KJV (though "through him" is a more common modern rendering), is composed of the preposition διά (dia) in the genitive case and the pronoun αὐτοῦ (autou, "him") referring to the Logos 33. The preposition διά with the genitive case typically indicates agency or instrumentality, showing that the Logos was the agent through whom God created all things.
ἐγένετο (Egeneto), translated as "were made" (first occurrence) and "made" (second occurrence), is the aorist middle indicative third person singular of γίνομαι (ginomai), meaning "came into being," "was made," or "happened" 33. The aorist tense in Greek generally refers to a past action without specifying its duration. The use of egeneto to describe the creation of "all things" contrasts with the use of ēn to describe the eternal being of the Logos.
αὐτοῦ (Autou) is the genitive singular form of αὐτός (autos), meaning "him," and in this context refers to the Logos 33.
χωρὶς (Chōris), translated as "without," is a preposition that takes the genitive case and indicates separation or exclusion 33. The phrase "χωρὶς αὐτοῦ" means "without him," again referring to the Logos.
οὐδὲ (Oude), translated as "was not" in conjunction with the following verb, is a negative adverb meaning "neither," "nor," or "not even" 33. It intensifies the negation in the statement about nothing being made without the Logos.
ἕν (Hen), translated as "any thing," is the nominative singular neuter form of εἷς (heis), meaning "one" or "a single thing" 33. The phrase "οὐδὲ ἕν" literally means "not even one thing," emphasizing the absolute necessity of the Logos for creation.
ὃ (Ho), translated as "that," is a relative pronoun in the nominative singular neuter form, referring back to "any thing" 33.
γέγονεν (Gegonen), translated as "was made" (third occurrence), is the perfect active indicative third person singular of γίνομαι (ginomai), meaning "has come into being" or "has been made" 33. The perfect tense in Greek indicates a past action with continuing results or a present state resulting from a past action. In this context, it likely refers to the totality of created things that continue to exist.
V. Theological Interpretations of John 1:1-3 Throughout Christian History
The opening verses of John's Gospel have been subject to extensive theological interpretation throughout Christian history, serving as a foundational text for understanding the nature of Christ and his relationship with God.
Early Church Fathers, grappling with the emerging doctrines of the Trinity and the person of Christ, frequently turned to John 1:1-3. Irenaeus, writing in the 2nd century, interpreted the passage to affirm the divinity of Christ and his role as the agent through whom God created all things, directly refuting Gnostic beliefs that posited a lesser creator deity 60. He emphasized the phrase "all things were made by him," including the material world, as evidence of Christ's integral role in creation. Origen, in the 3rd century, viewed the Logos as eternally begotten of the Father and distinct from Him, interpreting John 1:1-3 within a framework of divine procession, suggesting a hierarchical relationship while still affirming the Logos's divine nature 30. Tertullian, writing around the same time, utilized John 1:1 to argue for the distinct persons within the Trinity, highlighting the statement "the Word was with God" to emphasize the personal distinction between the Father and the Son, while also affirming "the Word was God" to assert their shared divine essence 30. These early interpretations laid crucial groundwork for the later formalization of Trinitarian doctrine, using John 1:1-3 to establish the pre-existence, divinity, and creative agency of the Logos, understood as the Son of God.
Medieval theologians continued to build upon the patristic understanding of John 1:1-3, further developing the doctrine of the Trinity and Christ's role in creation within the context of scholastic philosophy 31. While the provided snippets do not offer specific medieval interpretations of this passage, it is reasonable to infer that prominent figures like Augustine and Thomas Aquinas would have drawn heavily upon these verses in their theological works. Augustine's emphasis on the divine intellect and will, and Aquinas's systematic approach to theology, would have likely incorporated John 1:1-3 to explain the eternal generation of the Son (the Logos) from the Father and the Son's instrumental role in the creation of the universe. Medieval interpretations often sought to harmonize philosophical concepts with biblical exegesis, providing a more reasoned and systematic understanding of the theological truths presented in John's prologue.
Contemporary scholars approach John 1:1-3 with a diverse range of perspectives, utilizing advanced linguistic tools, a deeper understanding of the historical and philosophical context of the New Testament, and various theological frameworks 1. There is ongoing debate regarding the precise translation and theological implications of the clause "καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος," particularly concerning the significance of the anarthrous θεὸς 32. Some scholars argue that the lack of the definite article indicates a qualitative meaning, suggesting that the Word possesses the divine nature or is "divine" 41. Others maintain that, based on grammatical rules and the broader context of Johannine theology, it affirms the full deity of the Word, even if distinct from the person of the Father 41. Contemporary scholarship also acknowledges the significant influence of Hellenistic philosophy, particularly the concept of Logos, and Jewish Wisdom literature on John's thought, exploring how John adapts and transforms these concepts to articulate his understanding of Jesus Christ 29. Despite the various interpretations, there is a general consensus among contemporary scholars regarding the passage's affirmation of Christ's pre-existence and his active role in creation, highlighting the profound theological significance of John 1:1-3 for understanding Christian Christology.
VI. The Significance of "the Word" (Logos)
The term "the Word" (ὁ λόγος) in John 1:1-3 carries immense significance, drawing upon a rich background in both Greek philosophy and Jewish religious thought 29.
In Greek thought, the concept of Logos had evolved over centuries. Philosophers like Heraclitus, in the pre-Socratic era, used Logos to describe a universal principle of reason and order that governs the cosmos 29. Later, Plato associated Logos with the realm of Forms, representing ultimate reality. The Stoics further developed the idea of Logos as the divine, rational principle that permeates and animates the universe, providing its structure and coherence 29. This philosophical background provided a framework for understanding a mediating principle between a transcendent God and the created world.
In Jewish thought, the concept of God's "Word" (dabar) held significant weight. The Old Testament frequently depicts God acting and creating through his word (Psalm 33:6), emphasizing its power and efficacy 31. Additionally, Jewish Wisdom literature personified Wisdom (Hokmah) as a divine attribute present with God from the beginning, actively involved in creation (Proverbs 8) 31. The Aramaic Targums, paraphrases of the Hebrew Bible, often used the term "Memra" (word) as a way to speak of God's active presence and agency in the world, sometimes acting as a mediator between the transcendent God and creation.
John's use of Logos in his Gospel is highly significant because it strategically bridges these two prominent intellectual traditions 29. By employing a term familiar to both his Jewish and Gentile audiences, John communicates the nature and role of Jesus Christ in a way that would resonate with their existing understanding of divine power, reason, and agency. However, John goes beyond these existing concepts, uniquely identifying the Logos with Jesus Christ 29. The subsequent declaration in John 1:14 that "the Word became flesh" (καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο) is the pivotal point where the abstract philosophical and theological concept of the Logos is concretely linked to the person of Jesus, asserting that the divine reason and creative power of God has become incarnate in human form 30.
VII. Theological Implications of John 1:1-3
The statements made in John 1:1-3 carry profound theological implications, particularly concerning the relationship between the Word and God, and the Word's role in creation.
The declaration "the Word was with God" (καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν) suggests a relationship of intimate communion and fellowship between the Word and God from the very beginning 32. The use of the preposition pros implies not only being in the presence of but also an orientation towards, indicating a dynamic and personal relationship. This statement lays the groundwork for understanding the Word as distinct from God, not merely an attribute but a distinct person existing in relationship with God the Father.
The subsequent assertion "the Word was God" (καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος), particularly with the absence of the definite article before θεὸς, has been a subject of intense theological scrutiny 32. While the first occurrence of "God" (τὸν θεόν) in the verse has the definite article and typically refers to God the Father, the anarthrous θεὸς in the final clause is often interpreted as indicating that the Word shares the very nature or essence of God, possessing divine attributes and being fully divine, without necessarily being ontologically identical to the person of the Father. This grammatical nuance is crucial for understanding the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, suggesting a unity of divine being between the Father and the Son (the Word) while maintaining their distinct personhood.
The statement in verse 3, "All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made" (πάντα δι' αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν ὃ γέγονεν), establishes the Word's indispensable role as the agent of creation 33. The use of the preposition dia with the genitive signifies that the Word was the instrument or means by which God brought all of creation into existence. This aligns with other biblical passages that speak of God creating through his Word or Wisdom (Psalm 33:6, Proverbs 8, Colossians 1:16), reinforcing the divine nature and pre-existence of the Word, as creation is an act typically attributed to God alone 31. The emphatic declaration that "without him was not any thing made that was made" underscores the absolute necessity of the Word in the creative process, leaving no room for the idea that anything could exist independently of his agency.
VIII. Conclusion
The analysis of John 1:1-3 in the King James Version reveals a passage of profound theological significance, deeply rooted in its historical context and meticulously translated from the Greek Textus Receptus. The etymological examination of key terms like Logos and Theos highlights the rich philosophical and religious background that informs John's language. Throughout Christian history, these verses have served as a cornerstone for understanding the identity of Jesus Christ, with early church fathers, medieval theologians, and contemporary scholars engaging in extensive interpretation of their meaning. The concept of the Logos as presented by John uniquely synthesizes Greek philosophical ideas and Jewish theological concepts, ultimately identifying the Logos as the pre-existent, divine Son of God who became incarnate. The theological implications of the passage are far-reaching, laying foundational support for the doctrine of the Trinity by asserting both the distinctness and the divine nature of the Word in relation to God the Father, and by establishing the Word's crucial role as the agent through whom all of creation came into being. John 1:1-3 remains an enduringly important text for Christian theology, offering a powerful and concise introduction to the person and work of Jesus Christ.
Works cited
The Deity of Christ: John 1:1-3 - The Majesty's Men, accessed March 28, 2025, https://themajestysmen.com/joshuajenkins/the-deity-of-christ-john-11-3/
What Is the King James Version of the Bible? History and Influence of the KJV, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.biblegateway.com/learn/bible-101/king-james-version/
King James Version - Wikipedia, accessed March 28, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version
King James: The Project | Born Out of Persecution: History of the ..., accessed March 28, 2025, https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/persecution_project/
King James Version (KJV) | Bible, History, & Background - Britannica, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/King-James-Version
The History Of The King James Version - KJV Bibles, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.kjvbibles.com/king-james-version-bible-history
The Texts | The King James Bible: A Translation for the Ages - DigitalCommons@Cedarville, accessed March 28, 2025, https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/kjv_texts/
www.britannica.com, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/King-James-Version#:~:text=In%201604%2C%20soon%20after%20James's,enjoyed%20some%20popularity%2C%20but%20its
Did King James I write the King James Bible? - Britannica, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/question/Did-King-James-I-write-the-King-James-Bible
Hampton Court Conference (act. 1604) - Kent Academic Repository, accessed March 28, 2025, https://kar.kent.ac.uk/67181/
Hampton Court Conference - Wikipedia, accessed March 28, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hampton_Court_Conference
Hampton Court Conference | Religious Reform, Henry VIII & Thomas Cranmer | Britannica, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/event/Hampton-Court-Conference
Hampton Court Conference, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/encyc/encyc05/htm/ii.iv.iii.htm
Hampton Court – Attendees - | King James Bible History, accessed March 28, 2025, https://kjbhistory.com/the-hampton-court-conference-attendees/
King James Version (KJV) - Version Information - BibleGateway.com, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/King-James-Version-KJV-Bible/
On which New Testament manuscripts did the KJV translators rely? - CARM.org, accessed March 28, 2025, https://carm.org/king-james-onlyism/on-which-new-testament-manuscripts-did-the-kjv-translators-rely/
Textus Receptus Bibles, accessed March 28, 2025, https://textusreceptusbibles.com/
Textus Receptus - King James Bible, accessed March 28, 2025, https://thekingsbible.com/Library/TextusReceptus
Textus Receptus - Wikipedia, accessed March 28, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textus_Receptus
What is the Textus Receptus? | GotQuestions.org, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.gotquestions.org/Textus-Receptus.html
The Greek New Testament Text of the King James Version | Religious Studies Center, accessed March 28, 2025, https://rsc.byu.edu/new-testament-history-culture-society/greek-new-testament-text-king-james-version
"Why are Some passages in the King James Version Left Out of our Modern Translations?" — George H Guthrie, accessed March 28, 2025, https://georgehguthrie.com/new-blog/manuscripts-behind-the-kjv
KJV vs NIV: the missing verses - Bible - Reddit, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/Bible/comments/v3q9rs/kjv_vs_niv_the_missing_verses/
Did the KJV translators have any unique source documents at their disposal? - Reddit, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/155ov2q/did_the_kjv_translators_have_any_unique_source/
KJV and the Textus Receptus - BibleTexts.com, accessed March 28, 2025, http://www.bibletexts.com/kjv-tr.htm
New Testament Manuscripts and the KJV, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.kjvbibles.com/new-testament-manuscripts-and-the-kjv
Lesson 6: John 1:1 in Greek | Learn Greek with John's Gospel | New Testament Koine Greek | λογος - YouTube, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qUwhWfIflA
greekbible.com, accessed March 28, 2025, https://greekbible.com/john/1/1#:~:text=John%201%3A1-,1,and%20the%20Word%20was%20God.
How do you interpret John 1:1, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”? - Reddit, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenChristian/comments/zwxrq4/how_do_you_interpret_john_11_in_the_beginning_was/
John 1:1 - Wikipedia, accessed March 28, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_1:1
What is Logos? A look at John 1:1-3 | Free Thinking Ministries, accessed March 28, 2025, https://freethinkingministries.com/what-is-logos-a-look-at-john-11-3/
John 1:1 Meaning and Translation - Alpha and Omega Ministries, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.aomin.org/aoblog/jehovahs-witnesses/john-11-meaning-and-translation/
John 1 Greek interlinear, parsed and per word translation, free online - Abarim Publications, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.abarim-publications.com/Interlinear-New-Testament/John/John-1-parsed.html
Jesus, The Word – John 1:1-3 | Jon Beck…Sermon Notes and Stuff, accessed March 28, 2025, https://pastorjonbeck.com/jesus-the-word-john-11-3/
Enduring Word Bible Commentary John Chapter 1, accessed March 28, 2025, https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/john-1/
www.reddit.com, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenChristian/comments/zwxrq4/how_do_you_interpret_john_11_in_the_beginning_was/#:~:text=John%20used%20the%20term%20Word,of%20Order%2C%20Reason%20and%20Structure.
en.wikipedia.org, accessed March 28, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_1:1#:~:text=In%20the%20beginning%20was%20the%20Word%2C%20and%20the%20Word%20was,later%20in%20the%20same%20chapter.
Can the phrase πάντα δι᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο in John 1:3 mean the word was the creator of all things? : r/AncientGreek - Reddit, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/AncientGreek/comments/e84j2f/can_the_phrase_%CF%80%E1%BD%B1%CE%BD%CF%84%CE%B1_%CE%B4%CE%B9_%CE%B1%E1%BD%90%CF%84%CE%BF%E1%BF%A6_%E1%BC%90%CE%B3%E1%BD%B3%CE%BD%CE%B5%CF%84%CE%BF_in_john_13/
John 1:1-3 - In the Beginning Was the Word - Bible.ca, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.bible.ca/ef/expository-john-1-1-3.htm
But what about John 1:1? - The Living Truth Fellowship, accessed March 28, 2025, https://thelivingtruthfellowship.org/jesus-christ/but-what-about-john-11/
Academic Consensus of John 1:1 : r/AcademicBiblical - Reddit, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/1f88dej/academic_consensus_of_john_11/
On the Use of Theos and Theon in John 1:1 and Elsewhere in the Greek New Testament, accessed March 28, 2025, https://thestarman.pcministry.com/bible/qa/theos-theon.html
The First Verse In John Everyone Needs To Understand - Jews for Judaism, accessed March 28, 2025, https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/new-testament-refutations-trinity-doctrine-part-21
John 1:1 - Does it say the Word was God? - From Daniel to Revelation, accessed March 28, 2025, https://revelationbyjesuschrist.com/word-was-god/
Is it the consensus among scholars that "the Word was God" is a mistranslation of John 1:1?, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/15gfw1r/is_it_the_consensus_among_scholars_that_the_word/
John 1:1 and The Trinity | The Doctrine of the Trinity Examined, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.trinityexamined.com/john-1-and-the-trinity/
πρὸς in John 1:1 : r/Koine - Reddit, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/Koine/comments/xf78cr/%CF%80%CF%81%E1%BD%B8%CF%82_in_john_11/
thestarman.pcministry.com, accessed March 28, 2025, https://thestarman.pcministry.com/bible/qa/theos-theon.html#:~:text=In%20John%201%3A1b%2C%20the,spelling)%20of%20the%20noun%20God.
Deedat and the Greek Language - Answering Islam, accessed March 28, 2025, https://answering-islam.org/Responses/Deedat/greek.html
s3.amazonaws.com, accessed March 28, 2025, https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.cloversites.com/97/97ed6bb7-02a7-4b87-8cd6-35ba8accb7d8/documents/JWs_-_Jn._1.1_-_Word_Was_God_-TK.pdf
John 1:3 Commentary - Precept Austin, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.preceptaustin.org/john_13_commentary
John 1:3 - Wikipedia, accessed March 28, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_1:3
Greek Interlinear Layout for John 1:3 (TR • KJV) - Blue Letter Bible, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.blueletterbible.org/tools/interlinear/tr/jhn/1/3/
John 1:3 Greek Text Analysis - Bible Hub, accessed March 28, 2025, https://biblehub.com/text/john/1-3.htm
John 1:3 Decoded: How “Through Him All Things Were Made | by M. J. Kelley II | Medium, accessed March 28, 2025, https://medium.com/@mjkelleyII/john-1-3-decoded-how-through-him-all-things-were-made-c787c94b394b
1.3 First John 1:3 (Greek) - YouTube, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PobEQWcybzM
John 1:3 Lexicon: All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. - Bible Hub, accessed March 28, 2025, https://biblehub.com/lexicon/john/1-3.htm
Without him not one thing … (John 1:3) – Dust and Glory, accessed March 28, 2025, https://campuspress.yale.edu/dustandglory/john-1-3/
The Importance of the Punctuation of John 1:3-4 | Bite-Sized Exegesis, accessed March 28, 2025, https://bitesizedexegesis.com/2021/02/15/the-importance-of-the-punctuation-of-john-13-4/
John i. 1 - Church Fathers Scripture Index, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.catholiccrossreference.online/fathers/index.php/John%201:1;%20Rev%201:8
John 1:3 - Church Fathers Scripture Index, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.catholiccrossreference.online/fathers/index.php/John%201:3;%20Heb%205:7-10
Commentary on John 1:[1-9], 10-18 - Working Preacher from Luther Seminary, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.workingpreacher.org/commentaries/revised-common-lectionary/second-sunday-of-christmas-2/commentary-on-john-11-9-10-18-8
Books of 1-3 John | Guide with Key Information and Resources - The Bible Project, accessed March 28, 2025, https://bibleproject.com/guides/books-of-1-3-john/
No comments:
Post a Comment