those who may, Berean-like, search out these things, but who may not be possessed of the

necessary knowledge to commence their studies. The reader will see that, whilst we have

the article before the word "God" in the third line, it is omitted in the "and the God," but

"and God." Thus we may read the sentence:--

The use of the Article, however, determines the true subject of the sentence, hence we

see that in lines 1 and 4 ho logos--"the Word"--is the subject. Now, seeing that we

know which is the subject of the sentence, we need not be so careful to place it at the

beginning; therefore we find that emphasis is laid upon the subject, "the Word," by the

figure of speech called Hyperbaton. This figure is aptly named, because the word means

"a stepping over," and by placing a word out of position renders it more conspicuous.

Hence in reading the passage we must emphasize like this--"in the beginning was THE

WORD, and God THE WORD was." No amount of explanation which we may give can

have any weight unless it can be seen to be in harmony with the Scriptures of truth, and

so we will take the reader to other passages, rather than give cut and dried grammatical

If any of our readers are confronted with one of these exponents of the "Greek

original" whose interpretation we are considering, they might ask for an evidence of

consistency by reading the translation given of another verse in the self-same chapter,

viz., verse 14. If kai Theos en ho logos means and the Word was A GOD," why should

not kai ho logos sarx egeneto be translated, "and the Word became A flesh?" Such a

translation is manifestly absurd, yet it is based upon precisely the same argument, the

absence of the article before the word flesh. We might multiply instances. Does ho

Theos agape estin mean "The God is A love?"

A moment's reflection will enable any reader to see the truth of the grammatical rule,

that the article is employed to demonstrate, whilst its omission describes. "The God"

points out the subject of the sentence, "is love" describes His essence. So "the Word

became flesh" describes the sphere into which the Word came, namely flesh. So in John

1: 1, "the Word" (demonstrative) was, so far as His essence is concerned, "God"

(descriptive). Thus we read the two passages together:--

The Word WAS GOD. The Word BECAME FLESH.

In each case the absence of the article describes, whilst the change in the verb tells that in

the first instance the condition was one of essential character, "was" (verb "to be"; the

other that which He assumed when the fulness of time came, "He became." Before we

deal more fully with these two verbs, there is one more verse in the first chapter that

claims our attention. "No one hath seen God at any time" (verse18). Here again the

word Theos is without the article, and if treated as in the first verse would be rendered,

"No one hath seen A God at any time!" God in His essence no one hath seen, yet such

passages as Gen. 32: 24-32; Josh. 5: 13-15; Ezek. 1: 26-28, &100:, are inspired truth. If

the first verse had read, "the Word was the God," we should have to exclude both the