One In The Greek

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I'm pretty sure the reason for heis, mia, hen usages is grammatical and regulated by ordinary Greek language rules, and has little or nothing to do with metaphysics.

Probably true to a large degree.

If somebody truly fluent in Greek has commentary on the gender issue, it could be interesting. Most NT grammatical seminarians today are far from fluent, ergo irrelevant.

[Steven Avery]

John 10:30 (AV)
I and my Father are one.

1 John 5:7-8
For there are three that bear record in heaven,
the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:
and these three are one.
And there are three that bear witness in earth,
the spirit, and the water, and the blood:
and these three agree in one.

John 17:11
And now I am no more in the world,
but these are in the world, and I come to thee.
Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

John 17:20-23
Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

==============

And I raised the question of how the early church writers look at the oneness of John 10:30.

The early writers will generally be more helpful than bumbling modern grammarians parsing away.

The references can be looked up:

Facebook - Patristics for Protestants
https://www.facebook.com/groups/8846...9714380114343/

Darren Talley
John 17:11, 20, and 22 might give you your answer. :-)

Origen -
"From all which I am of opinion, so far as I can see, that this order of the human race has been appointed in order that in the future world, or in ages to come, when there shall be the new heavens and new earth, spoken of by Isaiah, it may be restored to that unity promised by the Lord Jesus in His prayer to God the Father on behalf of His disciples: "I do not pray for these alone, but for all who shall believe on Me through their word: that they all. may be one, as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us;" and again, when He says: "That they may be one, even as We are one; I in them, and Thou in Me, that they may be made perfect in one."
(de Principiis, Book 1, ch 6)

Jacob O'Flanagan
Of the Trinitarian writings that I recall, especially the anti-Arian ones, they understand the oneness passages to be referring to the unity in Deity/ substance. Theologically, if they do not have unity of essence, then that brings out issues of either making God two (really it would end up being three) rather than one, or keeping God one and making the Son and the Holy Spirit less than "true God".

-Origen "Against Celsus" Bk. 8 Ch. 12
-Hippolytus "Against Noetus" (he claimed that the Son was the same person as the Father and uses 'power' instead of 'essense') Ch. 7
-Novatian "Treatise Concerning the Trinity" Ch. 13, 15, 27
-Gregory Thaumaturgis "Homily on the Baptism of Jesus" Conclusion
-Alexander of Alexandria "First Epistle on the Arian Heresy" Ch. 9
-Alexander of Alexandria "Second Epistle on the Arian Heresy" Ch. 3
-Dionysius of Rome "Against the Sabbelians" Ch. 3

The conversation is continuing, and I added a bit more on Cyprian and Didymus.

There are a couple of good spots to check, the ACCS book, also a place online.

John 1-10
edited by Joel C. Elowsky
Partial p. 359-360
https://books.google.com/books?id=rW1ldBkoDY4C&pg=PT397

We see Augustine x4 and Hippolytus, Cyprian, Tertullian, Cyril of Alexandria and Hilary are in the two visible pages.

Is there a paper that reviews the early church writers (ECW) on this fundamental and fascinating doctrinal question.

[Scott Pitta]

I just looked in my BAGD lexicon. Heis, hen and mia all have the same meaning.

Translators translate it "one".

Any examples from major translations where heis is translated as something else ??

[Costeon]

From Servetus's On the Errors of the Trinity regarding the meaning of one in John 10.30: "Yet I think that the words make simpler sense, for Christ is speaking, and he said, are; because, being God and man, he said, one in the neuter, as Tertullian says, and he did not say, one in the masculine. For the meaning of one in the masculine singular seems to be as if it denoted the singleness of one and the same being. But one in the neuter has not reference to singleness, but to oneness of mind, and harmony, so that the two might be credited with one power. And this is what the earlier writers rightly called ousia, because there is one authority given by the Father to the Son. . . . Greece never knew of hen being taken for one nature (I.33).

[rdp]

*I appreciate the content of this thread. Again, I sincerely hope this doesn’t appear self-promoting in any way, but I have written extensively on the Trinitarian’s view of John 10.30 regarding the neuter “hen.” Indeed, this particular adjective in both the neuter and masculine have been a major point of interest in my research in the LXX & NT.

*If interested, here are the articles wherein I take the time to delineate the differences between the masculine & neuter predicative adjective rendered “one:” https://apostolicacademics.com/?s=Neuter&submit=Search

*My experience has been that the masculine singular “heis” is an insurmountable tag for the Trinitarian position in Mark 12.29, et al.

*Good points by everyone in this thread IMO.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Scott Pitta

I just looked in my BAGD lexicon. Heis, hen and mia all have the same meaning.

Translators translate it "one".

Any examples from major translations where heis is translated as something else ??

*It is the difference in genders that constitute the distinction in meaning. And, yes, there are translations that adopt varying renderings of this particular adjective. For ex., the Amplified Bible translates Galatians 3.20 as “but God is only one person” based upon the masculine tag of the adjective. Cf., also the NEB in Galatians 3.28 wherein it also renders the masculine as “one person.” There are other examples as well from the LXX (e.g., Ezekiel 33.24, et al.).

[Scott Pitta]

Gal. 3:20 ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν. Frances Siewert added a little something extra that Paul did not write. We generally call that a paraphrase.

Gal. 3:28 ⸀πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ. Equally simple Greek sentence construction. "For you are all one in Christ Jesus". There are no linguistic markers to indicate "one" in this sentence must be translated differently that the normal use.

That is why out of the many well done translations in English, only a pair of examples can be found to prove your point.

If distinctions in genders demands specific translations, why are they not translated that way in the English translations ?? What scholarly reference is there that documents the importance in gender when translating heis ??

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Scott Pitta

Gal. 3:20 ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν. Frances Siewert added a little something extra that Paul did not write. We generally call that a paraphrase.

Gal. 3:28 ⸀πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ. Equally simple Greek sentence construction. "For you are all one in Christ Jesus". There are no linguistic markers to indicate "one" in this sentence must be translated differently that the normal use.

That is why out of the many well done translations in English, only a pair of examples can be found to prove your point.

If distinctions in genders demands specific translations, why are they not translated that way in the English translations ?? What scholarly reference is there that documents the importance in gender when translating heis ??

*You can’t be serious. I thought you had at least Greek I under your belt? How many “scholarly references” would you like me to copy? Cf. Robertson, Wuest, Thayer, etc. ad nauseum.

*This is well attested in the link I provided above, as well as the debates I referenced earlier in this thread (not at my laptop right now). The masculine singular denotes one person and never communicates more than one person in the GNT (for about the 5th time now).

*Ohhhh, never mind....

[Scott Pitta]

Wuerst is devotional and not academic. I have never seen his name or literature in the scholarly literature. Thayer is hopelessly outdated. Vincent fall into the same category. Outdated commentaries are equally unimpressive. These are names I have never seen in the scholarly literature typified at SBL and NTS.

I did read the article on the link. But I do not see any translation data, but lots of theology.

There was no data showing why heis should be translated in any other way than "one". Nor do the major translators show variation in how heis is translated.

Yes, 2 years of college level Koine Greek plus 30 years of translating are under my belt.

My focus is on translation, not theology.

For what it is worth, LXX Greek grammar is not exactly the same as Koine Greek grammar. I am not trained in LXX Greek.

[Scott Pitta]

Detailed citation from Robertsons grammar and from BAGD are what I am looking for. Is this topic covered in professional journals like SBL or NT or NTS ??