Understanding John 1:14

[The Archangel]

In what manner was Christ "from" (para) the Father? If we let scripture explain scripture, then John 7:29 is on point:

“I do know Him, because I am from Him, and He sent Me.”​

So the idea of para in this usage is to be provided by the Father for His purpose.

First off, the grammar and word usage of John 7:29 does not directly inform the grammar and word usage of John 1:14.

Here's John 7:29 in Greek: ἐγὼ οἶδα αὐτόν, ὅτι παρʼ αὐτοῦ εἰμι κἀκεῖνός με ἀπέστειλεν (emphasis mine)

The παρα is in bold, and it is παρα + genitive. Here it means "from." There is no "sent" here. "Sent" does appear, however, using a separate word: ἀπέστειλεν. Jesus is saying He comes "from Him (God)" and "He (God) sent Him." But, He is saying both things separately.

I have no problem that Christ came from God and was sent from God. The problem I have is that παρα doesn't mean "sent from," especially in John 1:14. In fact, John 7:29 argues against your point in John 1:14. If παρα meant "sent from," certainly John would have used only παρα to convey the idea that Jesus was sent from God in John 7:29. But, of course, he doesn't. He includes the verb "sent."

The Archangel

 

[The Archangel]

Folks, this poster is totally off topic, trying to make the topic either his purity or my malfeasance , rather than the study of John 1:14. Why he allowed to derail discussion with off topic posts is beyond me.

Seriously? Where have you been for this entire past thread?

The Archangel

 

[Van]

First off, the grammar and word usage of John 7:29 does not inform the grammar and word usage of John 1:14.

Here's John 7:29 in Greek: ἐγὼ οἶδα αὐτόν, ὅτι παρʼ αὐτοῦ εἰμι κἀκεῖνός με ἀπέστειλεν (emphasis mine)

The παρα is in bold, and it is παρα + genitive. Here it means "from." There is no "sent" here. "Sent" does appear, however, using a separate word: ἀπέστειλεν. Jesus is saying He comes "from Him (God)" and "He (God) sent Him." But, He is saying both things separately.

I have no problem that Christ came from God and was sent from God. The problem I have is that παρα doesn't mean "sent from," especially in John 1:14. In fact, John 7:29 argues against your point in John 1:14. If παρα meant "sent from," certainly John would have used only παρα to convey the idea that Jesus was sent from God in John 7:29. But, of course, he doesn't. He includes the verb "sent."

The Archangel

This poster is still shoveling sand against the tide of truth!
Now he says Jesus being from and sent by the Father does not inform our understanding of the intended meaning of para in John 1:14! Ludicrous.

And again this poster falsely claims para does not mean sent from, but more than a dozen published translations render para as sent from or sent by, so he is falsely claiming all these experts are wrong. Go figure.

Further, did I say or imply para should always be rendered "sent from?" Nope.

 

[Van]

In what manner was Christ "from" (para) the Father? If we let scripture explain scripture, then John 7:29 is on point:

“I do know Him, because I am from Him, and He sent Me.”​

So the idea of para in the John 1:14 usage is to be provided by the Father for His purpose.

Why is "sent from" to be the preferred choice in understanding than just "from?" Because "from" might refer to being fathered in a created sense, rather than the actual meaning of sending the existing Logos for the Father's purpose.

 

[The Archangel]

This poster is still shoveling sand against the tide of truth!
Now he says Jesus being from and sent by the Father does not inform our understanding of the intended meaning of para in John 1:14! Ludicrous.

And again this poster falsely claims para does not mean sent from, but more than a dozen published translations render para as sent from or sent by, so he is falsely claiming all these experts are wrong. Go figure.

Further, did I say or imply para should always be rendered "sent from?" Nope.

Did you even read the post? Did you see that in John 7:29 both words "sent" and "from" are present, but from different words???

So, you call me a liar? (What else does "Shoveling sand against the tide of truth" mean?)

The Archangel

 

[Van]

Did you even read the post? Did you see that in John 7:29 both words "sent" and "from" are present, but from different words???

So, you call me a liar? (What else does "Shoveling sand against the tide of truth" mean?)

The Archangel

Why is this poster addressing my behavior allowed to post off topic posts? Go figure.
In what manner was Christ "from" (para) the Father? If we let scripture explain scripture, then John 7:29 is on point:

“I do know Him, because I am from Him, and He sent Me.”​

So the idea of para in the John 1:14 usage is to be provided by the Father for His purpose.

Why is "sent from" to be the preferred choice in understanding than just "from?" Because "from" might refer to being fathered in a created sense, rather than the actual meaning of sending the existing Logos for the Father's purpose.

Now he says Jesus being from and sent by the Father does not inform our understanding of the intended meaning of para in John 1:14! Ludicrous.

And again this poster falsely claims para does not mean sent from, but more than a dozen published translations render para as sent from or sent by, so he is falsely claiming all these experts are wrong. Go figure.

Further, did I say or imply para should always be rendered "sent from?" Nope.

 

[The Archangel]

Why is this poster addressing my behavior allowed to post off topic posts? Go figure.
In what manner was Christ "from" (para) the Father? If we let scripture explain scripture, then John 7:29 is on point:

“I do know Him, because I am from Him, and He sent Me.”​

So the idea of para in the John 1:14 usage is to be provided by the Father for His purpose.

Why is "sent from" to be the preferred choice in understanding than just "from?" Because "from" might refer to being fathered in a created sense, rather than the actual meaning of sending the existing Logos for the Father's purpose.

Now he says Jesus being from and sent by the Father does not inform our understanding of the intended meaning of para in John 1:14! Ludicrous.

And again this poster falsely claims para does not mean sent from, but more than a dozen published translations render para as sent from or sent by, so he is falsely claiming all these experts are wrong. Go figure.

Further, did I say or imply para should always be rendered "sent from?" Nope.

You’re talking two different things here: translation and meaning. As I’ve stated, I have no problem with Jesus being “sent from” God in general (that’s what John 7:29 says). I do, however, have a problem with your claim that para can be translated as “sent from” in John 1:14.

For reasons I’ve already given, para does not mean “sent from” in John 1:14.

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Van]

You’re talking two different things here: translation and meaning. As I’ve stated, I have no problem with Jesus being “sent from” God in general (that’s what John 7:29 says). I do, however, have a problem with your claim that para can be translated as “sent from” in John 1:14.

For reasons I’ve already given, para does not mean “sent from” in John 1:14.

The Archangel
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You just figuring out there is a difference! I have addressed both numerous times.

Your false claim para cannot be translated as sent from in John 1:14 has no basis in reality. The choice is contextual and within the range of historical meanings. Nothing in the grammar precludes the choice.

Why is "sent from" to be the preferred choice in understanding than just "from?" Because "from" might refer to being fathered in a created sense, rather than the actual meaning of sending the existing Logos for the Father's purpose.

 

[The Archangel]

You just figuring out there is a difference! I have addressed both numerous times.

Your false claim para cannot be translated as sent from in John 1:14 has no basis in reality. The choice is contextual and within the range of historical meanings. Nothing in the grammar precludes the choice.

Why is "sent from" to be the preferred choice in understanding than just "from?" Because "from" might refer to being fathered in a created sense, rather than the actual meaning of sending the existing Logos for the Father's purpose.

Nope. You’re not going to be right about this translation issue in John 1:14 no matter how many times you post your errant thoughts.

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Van]

Nope. You’re not going to be right about this translation issue in John 1:14 no matter how many times you post your errant thoughts.

The Archangel
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yet another taint so post of errant thoughts.

 

[Salty]

This will be closed no sooner than 630 pm (EDT) / 330 pm PST

 

[Salty]

This will be closed no sooner than 630 pm (EDT) / 330 pm PST

This thread is closed