GREEK PRONUNCIATION 15 (John 1:1)

This video was produced as a result of requests by subscribers. John 1:1 is probably the most discussed verse in the New Testament. As simplistic as its wording and expression may seem, this verse carries an enormous theological load that hinges on a grammatically, contextually, and theologically sound interpretation. At first I felt that this video project would be a bold move on my part in that this verse could not be reduced to a brief discussion in video form. After seeing the final product, however, I felt encouraged by the prospect that this 20-minute video is now likely to benefit interested viewers.

[@CRoadwarrior]

Excellent video. Thanks for making these using modern Greek pronunciation.

[@PhilemonZachariou]

My pleasure! -PZ

[@forresterj]

Fantastic lesson, thank you. Understanding the adjectival function of Θεος in 1:1c truly unlocks so much of John's gospel.

[@PhilemonZachariou]

Insightful feedback. Thank you! -PZ

[@1littlefish]

Thank you Dr. Philemon. I highly value all of your content.

[@PhilemonZachariou]

Thank you, my pleasure! -PZ

[@learnbiblicalgreek316]

John 1:1 is a well-known and often quoted verse, nevertheless, it is misunderstood and misinterpreted by many. Thank you for this video which is enlightening digging deeper into the Greek and the historical context in which John is writing. He refers again to the Logos in the last book of the Bible, Rev 19:13 καὶ περιβεβλημένος ἱμάτιον βεβαμμένον αἵματι· καὶ καλεῖται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, Ὁ Λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ. And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

[@PhilemonZachariou]

I thank you for your kind words and valuable observations. Indeed, Rev. 19:13 strongly speaks of the One "whose name is ὁ Λόγος τoῦ Θεοῦ" "the Word of God." This is the closest allusion to Jesus Christ as the Λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ besides the four references to Him in John ch. 1 as ὁ Λόγος. The reason I did not group Rev. 19:13 with the four references to Λόγος in John ch 1 is that it does not as absolutely and as directly identify ὁ Λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ with Jesus Christ by name-even though we have no doubt whatsoever that that is the Person it is referring to. I do make a reference to Rev. 19:13 (see video at 3.15) but, again, do not line it up with the four direct and absolute identification references of Λόγος in John ch. 1. Remain blessed. -PZ

[@cgodfrey6118]

Excellent lesson! I always learn from you!

[@PhilemonZachariou]

Awesome, thank you! -PZ

[@DavidParshall-f4j]

Thank you thank you Dr. Zacharious

[@PhilemonZachariou]

My pleasure! -PZ

[@mariabejarano7849]

Interesting

[@frankpopolano6004]

That about says it all!

[@PhilemonZachariou]

Thank you! -PZ

[@travm.7472]

Thank you brother.

[@PhilemonZachariou]

My pleasure! -PZ

[@Rick_Alden]

Could not 'God was the Word' be understood that the Word was 'the exact representation of God's being'?

[@PhilemonZachariou]

John 14:8: Philip says to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it suffices for us." 9 Jesus says to him, "Philip, I have been with you for so long and you haven't known me? Whoever sees me has seen the Father. How come you are saying, 'Show us the Father' ?" Rick, you need not rely on just John 1:1 to be able to figure out that Jesus was/is the exact representation of God the Father. But to address your specific concern, let me say that "God was the Word" does also say that the Logos was the exact representation of the Father in attributes, essence, nature, and qualities. Remember Jesus' words: "He who sees me has seen the Father." -PZ

[@PhilemonZachariou]

@CHILDRENOFLIGHTMINISTRY -- The following most valuable comments by @CHILDRENOFLIGHTMINISTRY were accidentally and inadvertently removed. Fortunately, I was able to locate the same comments on my iPhone, so I was able to copy them word-for-word and place them here. My sincere apologies to the sender(s). These were the very first and most valuable comments on this video, which were received with gratitude. -- § "Thank you, Dr. Zachariou Philemon, for your invaluable contribution in preparing and sharing this enlightening explanation of John 1:1. Your insights provide significant clarity on a topic that has been misunderstood and misinterpreted by groups such as the Jehovah's Witnesses and those adhering to Oneness religion. Their misinterpretations and mistranslations have led to confusion and distortion of the true meaning of the scripture. § With this video, we can now possess a powerful tool in our apologetic arsenal to defend the integrity of God's word and to counter the falsehoods propagated by those who misuse it. Your thorough examination sheds light on the correct interpretation of John 1:1, equipping us with the knowledge and understanding needed to discern truth from error. § Once again, thank you for your dedication and diligence in providing this invaluable resource. It will undoubtedly serve as a beacon of truth and a shield against deception for many seekers of the genuine message of the Gospel."

[@PhilemonZachariou]

Thank you ! I take your comments as a sign of fulfillment. -PZ

[@seagrif]

This was a wonderful presentation, very clear and cannot leave doubt in anyone's mind. I'll be referring people here to watch your video when I see that they subscribe to some error, such as the idea that 'Jesus was not God', which I've seen far too often on the internet. I have a pronunciation question that came up a few times recently. When a consonant combination comes together such as ...φθμ..., my assumption is that both the preceding voiceless consonants will become voiced because of the voiced μυ, but I thought it couldn't hurt to ask you about it.

[@PhilemonZachariou]

I appreciate your kind words and intent to share this video. As for your question regarding φθμ, this is not a consonant cluster in Greek. The clusters φθ and θμ are Greek, as well as μφθ, but, again, not φθμ. At any rate, in Greek assimilation commonly occurs at initial or medial position, and usually optionally at word juncture. Voiceless [s], for instance, becomes voiced ([z]-like) when followed by a voiced sound at initial position (Σμύρνα > [zmirna], πρέσβυς [prezvis]). At word juncture, assimilation is idiosyncratic, as it depends on individual conversational speed, notable or imperceptible pause, and sometimes even spelling pronunciation. Some cases are fixed, e.g., ὁ έν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς [o endis uranis] "who (art) in the heavens" (Lord's Prayer), where voiced ν [n] meets voiceless [t] and turns it into a "voiced [t]" (= [d]). But the assimilation of such fixed cases at word juncture can be "undone" if a person pauses a bit between words. There are countless cases, however, in which a voiceless sound does not change into voiced sound when followed by a voiced sound, e.g., ἀριθμός [ariθmos], where voiceless [θ] remains voiceless even though it is followed by voiced μ [m]. This latter example is perhaps closer to your question, as it pertains to θμ. Most of assimilation cases involve [s] > [z], μπ > [mb], ντ > [nd], νκ > [ŋg]. -PZ

[@JoelFuhrmann]

Wonderful lesson! Can I ask you to elaborate on the meaning of the preposition προς? I’ve heard that it implies a relationship between two different things, so that a husband can be προς his wife, but not προς himself, thus emphasizing its use in John 1:1-2 as being the relationship between three distinct persons and not one in three states as Sabellianism describes.

[@PhilemonZachariou]

The preposition πρός implies not merely existence alongside but personal communion. It is more than μετά "with" or παρἀ "beside, next to." It expresses the presence of one person with another. The word for "face" πρόσωπον is a compound that includes πρός (πρός + ὤψ, ὀπός "eye, face"). Ὁ Λόγος was face to face with God, in communion with God. Compare: Paul stayed πρός with Cephas (Peter) three days (Gal.1:18); John says ἐλπίζω γενέσθαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς "I hope to be with you." The preposition implies distinct/separate personality. -PZ

[@thelthrythquezada8397]

I screen recorded that 1:1-14. Gonna read along to it and get the words to stick. That way I can read the Bible in Greek vs English. At least that is what I hope to do, I get distracted with too much. Art, Languages, DIY, mechanics, sure wish I could stick to one gift and move in that but that aint how I am programmed I guess.

[@PhilemonZachariou]

Keep at it with patience and persistence. Regards, -PZ

[@jorgesantell7220]

What is the difference between modern Greek and first century Greek? I have Greek friends and they told me that they have to learn it in school

[@PhilemonZachariou]

Hello, @jorgesantelli7270. Today's Neohellenic (Modern Greek) is phonologically very much the way Greek was two millennia ago. This means that the phonemic sounds of Greek, the sounds that make a difference in meaning, are the same: 15 consonant phonemes, and five vowel phonemes. Neohellenic is more simplistic in grammar, though both share the same grammatical categories. For example, Neohellenic preserves the two numbers, (singular, plural), the three declensions, the four cases (the dative is used in various fixed expressions), the same articular forms, inflectional and conjugational endings (with some variations and differences), pretty much the same verbal system, e.g., the same active, middle, and passive voices, the same verbal aspect, the same tenses (with an additional continuous future in Neohellenic), the same moods (indicative, subjunctive, imperative, and the use of the optative), limited use of the infinitive (e.g., in fixed expressions), and the use of the participle. In other words, NT Greek and Neohellenic are in certain areas similar-to-identical, while in other areas they are different. I would dare say that typically those who are not intimately familiar with both NT Greek and Neohellenic tend to point out their differences, while those intimately familiar with both see the many similarities the two share, while acknowledging their differences as well. Bottom line: the Κοινή "Koine" [kini] of NT times and today's Greek are one and the same language, and they are in every respect more similar than they are different. Look for a KZbin video on 1st century vs. modern-day Greek in a video that is going to be released shortly. -PZ. PS. It just occurred to me to have you look at my article, "VERBAL ASPECT in NT GREEK - A Practical Approach through Neohellenic." This article points out the similarities between 1st century Greek and Neohellenic. Go to www.Greeklinguistics.net and click on "Articles." -PZ

[@jjeanniton]

This video REFUTES the "jehovah witness" contention that the NT Greek "kaì Theòs în o Lógos" should be translated "and the Word was _a god_". The truth is that THERE IS ONLY ONE TRUE GOD, and His name is JEHOVAH!

[@PhilemonZachariou]

Thank you! -PZ

[@jjeanniton]

@@PhilemonZachariou You're welcome 🤗

[@thelthrythquezada8397]

My mom is one and the older I get the more it hurts, but I am slowly starting to see why she stays in. She is the ONLY family member to EVER be an active JW so her learning they are not the real deal wouldn't cause her to loose not a one person. So I think she stays in for the (how do I say this without being mean) the perceived family closeness.