J. Harold Greenlee on the Definite Article at John 1:1

This Kindle book, And the Word was a god: Conversations on the Most Disputed Text in the New Testament - John 1:1 is available on Amazon by clicking here

Visit a local listing for this book here

The _general rule_ concerning the article in Greek, according to J. Harold Greenlee, (A Concise Exegetical Grammar of New Testament Greek):

"1. Nouns with the definite article are generally either
a)definite or
b) generic. Jn. 1.1, EN ARCH HN hO LOGOS, In the beginning was THE WORD...

2. Nouns without the definite article are generally either
a) indefinite or
b) qualitative. Jn. 1.6, EGENETO ANQRWPOS There came a man..."

However, he also adds:

"4. (Partial exception to the general rule) proper names of persons and places, and divine names and titles are definite in themselves; they may or may not take the article....
At the same time, when a divine title (God, Holy Spirit) has the article, there may be emphasis on the person--i.e., who he is; and when a divine title has no article there may be emphasis upon the nature or activity--i.e., what he is. Jn. 1.1 hO LOGOS HN PROS TON QEON, KAI QEOS HN hO LOGOS, the Word was with God (the father considered as a person), and the Word was Deity (not identical with God the Father, but of a nature or quality of God)."

This seems to be almost a cookie-cutter explanation of how we are to understand the troublesome words at John 1:1. Mounce's grammar reads similarly. I like Greenlee's translation of John 1:1, but his explanation is too interpretive. Greenlee has to to import the words "person" and "Father," neither of which are needed to expound the text.

An honest re-examination of Greenlee's words should be, if aiming for a qualitative view,  "the Word was with God, and the Word was Deity (not identical with God, as no identifier was used by John, but of a nature or quality of God)"

But, alas, this is how trinitarian grammarians are trained. They are brainwashed by their own into thinking this is proper, and to think they even make an exception of Divine Titles as set apart from other titles. Titles are titles, simply put.

No one thinks of translating Acts 12:22 "And the people shouted, saying, The voice of Deity, and not of a man."

or Acts 28:6 as "and said that he [Paul] was Deity."