[[1. The word, “beginning,” refers to the beginning. There can only be one beginning for all things that had a beginning.]]
Absolutely there can only be one beginning for everything that had a beginning. Nevertheless, There was one beginning for the angels; there was another one beginning for the stars; there was another one beginning for the trees and the plants; there was another one beginning for the the various animals; and then there was the one beginning for the human race when Adam and Eve was created, indeed, each creative day had its own beginning, and there was also the beginning of my life when I was conceived, etc.
[[There can be no other beginning. It makes no logical sense to have two beginnings for that which is finite.]]
There are many beginnings for that which is finite, for it depends on what one is referring to.
[[Therefore, the beginning mentioned in John 1:1 certainly does refer to “...the beginning of absolutely all…” as he puts it.]]
As I said, the context indicates otherwise.
[[2. If “the beginning” in John 1:1 was referring to “a” beginning of “most things,” it would have said something like “In the beginning of all things except…(those created by the Word? [not Jesus, since His Name is not mentioned in 1:1, although it is seen by examining other Scripture that He is that very Word]),”]]
Actually the context does show what beginning is being spoken of. John 1:10
[[ but it doesn’t say that. In fact, as Mr. Day points out, as he implicitly alludes to 1:3, it says “all things (panta) came into being through Him…” And notice that Mr. Day says, in his “imperative interpretation,” that:
“*panta* has to take into consideration the context) creation, but rather all the things made through [di] Jesus.”
“Panta” simply means “all things.” “Panta doesn’t have to take into consideration anything. It clearly means what it means. The only way it “must” take into consideration anything else is when the interpreter is bending grammatical rules because of his preconceived opinions.]]
Actually "panta" does take into consideration the context all through the NT. "Panta" simply means "all" with reference to what is being spoken of; it does not mean "all things", the word "things" in John 1:3 has to be supplied by the translator, as it does not appear in the Greek.
John 1:3
panta di autou egeneto kai chwris autou
ALL (THINGS) THROUGH HIM CAME TO BE, AND APART FROM HIM
3956 1223 0846_3 1096 2532 5565 0846_3
egeneto oude hen
CAME TO BE NOT BUT ONE (THING).
1096 3761 1520
ho gegonen
WHICH HAS COME TO BE
3739 1096
Westcott & Hort Interlinear as obtained from the Bible Students Library CD-ROM.
John uses another form of *pas* in verse 7:
John 1:7
houtos eelthen eis marturian hina
THIS (ONE) CAME INTO WITNESS, IN ORDER THAT
3778 2064 1519 3141 2443
martureesee peri tou phwtos hina pantes
HE MIGHT WITNESS ABOUT THE LIGHT, IN ORDER THAT ALL
3140 4012 3588 5457 2443 3956
pisteuswsin di autou
MIGHT BELIEVE THROUGH HIM.
4100 1223 0846_3
If we add "things" as a qualifier to *pantes* here, this would make no sense. John is certainly not including the angels in this.
Nor do we conclude that *pantes* would include the trees, the birds, the fish, etc. We go to verse 9 and see that John himself qualifies *panta* there with the word *anthrwpon* -- men. This shows that *panta* in itself does not mean "all things." So the context indicates that *pantes* in verse 7 could be qualified with "men" rather than "things", and thus many translations do add the word "men" in verse 7, even though it does not appear in the Greek, because that is what is indicated by the context.
Most translations qualify the usage of panta in verse three by adding the word "things". The Greek word hen [one] is also usually qualified by adding the word "thing". However, if the qualifier many translations use in verse seven were also used in verse 3, it could read: "All [men] came to be through him, and apart from him not one [man] came to be." Nevertheless, this could not directly be applied to all men, as Jesus was not in the spirit realm during the time he was on the earth to cause every child that was being born to have life. Having been used of God to set in motion procreation in man in the first man, Adam, Jesus would be the one through whom all men have come to be. A better qualifier, however, could be: "All [these] came to be through him, and apart from him not one [of these] came to be: that which came to be..."
Another scripture in which *panta* is used, and in which it is obvious from the context that it does not mean absolutely everything, is Mark 4:11. There are many scriptures that could be used, but this one shows how various translators have dealt with *panta* in this context, so as not to leave the impression that absolutely everything in the universe was being told to those on the outside in parables.
I am using various translations as obtained from:
http://www.tentmaker.org/BiblesOnline/
http://bible.crosswalk.com/
The King James Versions qualifies *ta panta* (the all) with the two words *these things*:
And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the
kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, *all these things* are done in parables
So does Webster:
And he said to them, To you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but to them that are outside, *all these things* are done in parables:
As well as the *Third Millennium" translation:
And He said unto them, "Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the Kingdom of God; but unto them that are without, *all these things* are done in parables,
The Twentieth Century translation qualifies panta with the word "teaching" rather than "things":
And he said. "To you the hidden truth of the Kingdom of God has been imparted; but to those who are outside it *all teaching* takes the form of parables, that--
Weymouth and Wesley simply qualify TA PANTA with "this":
"To you," He replied, "has been entrusted the secret truth concerning the Kingdom of God; but to those others outside your number *all this* is spoken in figurative language; -- Weymouth
"To you," He replied, "has been entrusted the secret truth concerning the Kingdom of God; but to those others outside your number *all this* is spoken in figurative language; -- Wesley
[[He has to make a contrast in “beginnings” between the one of creation with “all the things made through Jesus.” To do so, the rules of context are (intentionally?) ignored.]]
I wonder what rules of context is meant here. The context shows that that which was made through Jesus is the world into which he came and which rejected him. (John 1:10) I see no reason to believe that the beginning spoken of in verse 1 has reference to any other beginning that the beginning of that world, the same as at Matthew 19:4,5. Indeed, in view of the context, it appears to me that to see this "beginning" as referring to absolutely everything that was made ignores the context.
Note also the following translations of John 1:3,4, which probably give a better thought concerning the latter part of John 1:3 as connected with verse 4, and gives further proof as to what is included in the "all" referred to:
That which hath come into existence in him was life, and the life was the light of men. -- John 1:3b,4, Rotherham.
What came into existence in him was life, and the life was the light of men. John 1:4, Bible in Basic English.
All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. -- John 1:3,4, New Revised Standard
Ronald
http://reslight.addr.com/
