John 1:1

[gregglaser]

I understand the Greek manuscripts are best translated "...the Word was God" yet I notice the Aramaic renders the verse as "God was the Word". Can someone who knows both Greek and Aramaic shed some light on this? I think the question is important..there is a big difference between me saying "God is light" (as John does in 1John 1:5) and me saying "Light is God". I suspect the Aramaic is a closer and more accurate rendition of what John intended.
PS: In my interlinear Greek text it also says "...God was the Word" yet all the English translations I can locate reverse the order, I assume because the Greek grammar requires this.

Interesting question. As you probably already know, the answer is that the text says what it says. <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->

First, there are two potential Aramaic verb phrases in John 1:1 to which you could be referring for your ?was? translation (?Alha was the Word? and/or ?the Word was Alha?):

• 1. ayThuhy hua luTh
  AyTh (aleph-yod-tav) often refers to ?being? or ?is?, but it also means having or possessing (e.g. John 4:11). Next, uhy (vav-hey-yod) is the suffix here after ayTh, and my understanding is that it renders the verb with a masculine ?him? or ?his?. (see e.g., Introductory Lessons in Aramaic, by Eric D. Reymond, pp 47, 59). After that we read hua (hey-vav-aleph), which also means ?being? or ?is?, and indeed it often occurs in tandem with ayTh to impart the phrase ?having been?. And the final word of our 4-part Aramaic phrase is luTh (lamed-vav-tav), which means ?to? or ?towards? or ?with?, but just like the above words it too can be mysterious when it refers, as here in John 1:1, to something metaphysical (see other metaphysical examples of luTh in John 16:28, 17:7-8). From the root L (lamed), LuTh can also be a pointing word, to simply point toward an object that was just described but not named (or vice-versa).

• 2. ayThuhy hua hu
  Same analysis as above, except the last word is not luTh, but hu, which means him/her/it. Basically, hu personifies a singular object of the sentence. If the personification were plural, it would typically be hun.

So as we can see by the definitions above, these two phrases are more complex than ?is? or ?was?, especially given the context of John 1:1. Consider the perspective of the Aramaic and Greek scholar David Bauscher, who translates the first Aramaic phrase word-for-word as ?existing had been with? and the second phrase as ?Himself was that?. Here is his complete translation of John 1:1-2, ?In the Origin existing had been The Word and That Word existing had been with God and God Himself was That Word. This One existing was at the origin with God.? It?s a nice translation, flows well in English.

Here is another literal way you could translate the Aramaic of John 1:1-2 into English, ?In the beginning was His existence, the Word. And He the Word had His existence toward Alha. And Alha was His existence, He the Word. This was His existence in the beginning toward Alha.?

There are five occurrences of ayThuhy hua by the time we get to John 1:9 (and one plural reference of same in John 1:4), and the concepts that this phrase connects are very mighty and spiritual: Alha, light, darkness, Word, life. Fortunately this emphasizes a key point: the entire gospel provides the saga of real people in real life situations to help us understand the relative meaning of the Word to our perspectives.

After reading your question, I searched every occurrence of ayTh in the gospel of John ? I looked for any other use of either of these two phrases above (ayThuhy hua luTh or ayThuhy hua hu) from John 1:1. I did not find a single other use of the full and exact phrase in either case. For example, we can find several instances of ayThuhy hua, but not ayThuhy hua luTh.

In every instance of ayThuhy hua in the gospel of John, the phrase is describing a word (usually a noun) that comes after it (so it flows naturally and logically pointing forward in Aramaic; I found no word reversal required like you suggested for Greek), except where it can be read either way (frontwards or backwards) because the object is the same on both sides of the phrase. Let?s look at every example in John, and you?ll see the text flow forward naturally:

• John 1:40, ?And one of those who had heard from John and followed after Yahshua ayThuhy hua Andrew the brother of Simon.? The phrase operates on the follower Andrew who is named second, not Yahshua the leader who is named first. So the phrase (ayThuhy hua) points forward to the next word in the text ? in other words, Andrew is doing the hearing about Yahshua. If it pointed backward, then the text would be suggesting that Andrew was Yahshua.

• John 5:5, ?There was now there a man, one, of thirty eight years ayThuhy hua in sickness.? The phrase operates again on the latter noun (sickness), which comes after the phrase, rather than the one before it (years). So again, the phrase points forward.

• John 6:62, ?Offending to you? If you see then His son of man, of ascending to the place ayThuhy hua from before?? Here the phrase operates both forward and backward, because the noun (?place?) before the phrase and the adjective (?from before?) after the phrase are describing the same thing: heaven. Interesting.

• John 9:24, ?And they called the man a second time, to him ayThuhy hua blind and they said to him, ?give glory to Alha we for we know that this man is a sinner?.? Here we have another instance where the phrase can operate both forward and backward because both nouns (?him? and ?blind?) are describing the same object: the blind man. It generally makes more intuitive sense though and sounds more natural pointing forward.

• John 10:40, ?And he went to the crossing of the Jordan, to the place where ayThuhy hua John from before when he was baptizing and he was there.? Here, we see the phrase is pointing forward to John because he is the one who ?was having been? in the place. Because of the words ?from before? (mn qdym) after ?John?, we can?t point backwards to the place, lest we claim the place ?was having been? John!

• John 11:6, ?And when heard of his sickness, [he] remained in the place ayThuhy hua two days.? Here, if we accept the view that space and time are connected, we can point forward or backward. Pointing forward though makes the most intuitive sense --remaining in the place ?having its being? two days. If we point backward, we need to say the two days ?having its being? remaining in the place. Another problem with pointing backward would be that in the sense that two days is meant to be a plural expression, I think we would be looking for the plural of hua, which is hun.

• John 11:32, ?And she, Mary, when she came to where ayThuhy hua Yahshua and saw him, fell down at his feet.? Here again we point forward, to Yahshua.

• John 11:38, ?And Yahshua, when forceful in himself and to Him, came to the house of the grave. And it, the house of the grave ayThuhy hua a cave and a stone was set, being regarding its door.? To the extent that the grave and cave are the same thing, we can point forward or backward. The more logical grammar though is to point forward, because the cave ?was having been? a ?house of the grave?. Logic: Before it was a grave, it was a cave; but before it was a cave, it was not a grave.

• John 12:1, ?Yahshua, now before six days the Passover, came to Bethany where ayThuhy hua Lazarus he of raised from the house of the dead, he Yahshua.? The standard translation here naturally points forward, because Lazarus ?was having been? in Bethany, rather than Bethany ?was having been? in Lazarus. Note also that the grammar here is unique in the way it points forward, and may even be subtly suggesting that Lazarus lives in Yahshua and vice-versa? Mysterious.

• John 18:14, ?He was to Annas first because the father-in-law he was of Caiaphas who was the high priest of that year. AyThuhy hua now Caiaphas he who had counseled the Judeans that it was expedient that one man should die on behalf of the people.? The standard translation points forward, ?Was having been now Caiaphas, he who had counseled the Judeans??

• John 18:28, ?He was now Yahshua from toward Caiaphas, to the praetorium and ayThuhy hua daybreak.? This points forward too. Not sure there is any other option than pointing forward, given the letter vav (?and?) that precedes the phrase. Interesting, perhaps we might even infer something about the absence of any preceding vav before the phrases where they appear in John 1:1-2.

• John 18:40, ?And cried out all of them and said not to this, but Barabbas. AyThuhy hua now this Barabbas a thief.? Pointing forward again to describe Barabbas.

Based on the examples above, it appears that the operative phrases in John 1:1-2 (ayThuhy hua luTh or ayThuhy hua hu) can point forward or backward if the object is the same on both sides, but if the objects are different then the phrase points forward. Is that helpful for your question? I enjoyed this research. I think John 1 is meant to be especially mysterious and full of possibilities, in that manner like YHVH actually.
Personally, I feel the Word is very complex in the sense of the fundamental descriptions above, such as Alha ?has His being toward? (ayThuhy hua luTh) the Word.

• o In an energetic sense, possession involves coupling (e.g., electromagnetically, gravitationally). In a logical human sense, ayTh can refer to a recognized ownership or personal bond between two objects or people (i.e., father and son, or wine and wineglass).

• o In a directional sense, luTh means that a person/object is pointing toward another person/object, and its use in the gospel can imply an energetic connection between the people/objects, or the purpose of the pointing person/object.

Presently I reason that YHVH is the Word (John 12:48-50) that spoke light into existence per Genesis 1. Yahshua is the light created by the Word and living in the Word -- that?s a key message of John 1:1-9, and passages like John 16:15. We are invited to be sons of YHVH by following the light toward the Word. The Word is the beginning and the end of our entire existence here ? mlTha is the full (ml) sign (Tha) of our existence. We are therefore characters in a living story, and we are completely and wholly dependent on YHVH for this ongoing gift of life/saga that is destined for fulfillment. Like sound (i.e., words), light works on wave principles. In Aramaic the words for ?revelation? and ?wave? are the same ? gla. If you?re in tune with Yahshua the light, then his story resonates in your heart and mind, like awesome song waves you love to hear, like beautiful color waves you love to see, like words you love to follow because you love light and not darkness. When we do not follow Yahshua, then we don?t really love him fully by keeping the Father?s word. John 14:24. But if you love Yahshua, he will lead you to YHVH because YHVH loves Yahshua, and as Yahshua?s follower you live in Yahshua the light, so YHVH loves you too. John 14:21. YHVH desires for His light and Word to dwell inside the ones He loves. John 14:20-23. But before we get to that point of happy new beginnings in a new age/world, our story needs to involve judgment of this age/world by the Word, which is YHVH. John 12:48-50.