In English, the order of the sentence generally determines the use of the noun. The subject usually comes first. However, in Greek, the word order is flexible, and is used for emphasis rather than for strict grammatical functions. For example, if there are two nouns and one has the definite article, it is the subject.
Word order is also employed for the sake of emphasis. Generally, if a word is thrown to the front of a clause or sentence, it is done so for emphasis. When the predicate nominative is thrown in front of the verb, by virtue of word order it takes on emphasis.
A good illustration of this is John 1:1c. English versions usually say, “and the Word was God.” But in Greek, the word order is reversed.
Καί θεός ήν ό λόγος or (Kai theos en ho logos)
And God was the Word
We know that “the Word” is the subject, because it as the definite article and we translate it accordingly “and the Word was God.”
Two questions, both of theological importance, come to mind
1. Why was θεός (theos or god) thrown forward?
2. Why does it lack the article?
The emphatic position of θεός (theos) stresses its essence of quality” “What God was, the Word was” is how one translation brings out this force. Its lack of a definition article keeps us from identifying the Person of the Word (Jesus Christ) with the person of “God” (the Father).
That means that the word order tells us that Jesus Christ has all the divine attributes that the Father has: lack of the article tells us the Jesus Christ is not the Father.
John’s wording here is beautifully compact! It is in fact, one of the most elegantly terse theological statements one could ever find. As Martin Luther said, the lack of an article is against Sabellianism; the word order is against Arianism
To state this another way, let’s look at how the different Greek constructions would be rendered:
1. καί ό λόγος ήν ό θεός
“and the Word was the God” Sabellianism*
2. καί ό λόγος ήν θεός
“and the Word was a god” Arianism+
3. καί θεός ήν ό ΄λόγος
“and the Word was God” Orthodoxy
From: Mounce William D., Basics of Biblical Greek: Grammar
*
Sabellianism, (also known as
modalism,
modalistic monarchianism, or
modal monarchism) is the
nontrinitarian belief that the Heavenly Father, Resurrected Son and Holy Spirit are different
modes or
aspects of one monadic God, as perceived by
the believer, rather than three distinct persons within
the Godhead.
The term Sabellianism comes from
Sabellius, a theologian and priest from the 3rd century. Modalism differs from
Unitarianism by accepting the Christian doctrine that
Jesus is fully
God.
+
Arianism is the theological teaching attributed to
Arius (
ca. AD 250–336), a Christian
presbyter in
Alexandria, Egypt, concerning the relationship of God to the
Son of God (
Jesus of Nazareth). Arius asserted that the Son of God was a subordinate entity to God the Father.
Arianism is defined as those teachings attributed to Arius which are in opposition to mainstream
Trinitarian Christological doctrine, as determined by the first two
Ecumenical Councils and currently maintained by the
Roman Catholic Church, the
Eastern Orthodox Churches, the
Oriental Orthodox Churches, the
Assyrian Church of the East, all
Reformation-founded
Protestant churches (Lutheran, Reformed/Presbyterian, and Anglican), and a large majority of groups founded after the Reformation and calling themselves Protestant (such as Methodist, Baptist, most Pentecostals), with the exception of such groups as
Oneness Pentecostals, the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,
Jehovah's Witnesses,
Iglesia ni Cristo and
Branhamism
So is your church teaching you the truth about the Bible, or has it twisted this essential verse which tells us that Jesus was God, and yet a different person than the Father??
