Does John 1:1 prove Trinity ?

[أبو حفص الأيوبي]

An addition, in the above article, from our Greek brother and author on this site, brother Noor Adeen:

(Emphesis below is mine)
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 20:48:12 -0800 From: "Noor Adeen" <adeenenator@gmail.com> To: "Osama Abdallah" <quransearchcom@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Greeks will never live under islam again! HTML Attachment [ Scan and Save to Computer ]
A'salaamu'Alaikum dear brother Osama,


.........The verse (John 1:1) in its original Greek Contex is written as this:


εν (at) αρχη (first) ην (is/was) ο (the) λογος (reason/intellect) και (and) ο (the) λογος (reason/intellect) ην (is/was) προς (towards/facing/with) τον (the) θεον (god) και (and) θεος (god) ην (is/was) ο (the) λογος (reason/intellect)

so once we translate the whole verse we're basically seeing:

At first is/was the reason/intellect and the reason/intellect is/was towards/facing/with God (ton theon) and god is the reason/intellect.

The problem with that verse in Greek is that we see theos being written as just theos (god/diety) and not as o theos or ton theon, which are proper ways of saying God (or the god = al ilah = Allah). So the part which is written solely on its own as "theos", could be implying just any random diety, of course with ton theon written before in the sentence we automatically assume that we're still talking about the same God. Over all though, logos does not mean word in ancient Greek, and the translation of logos to word is a corrupt modern translation of the meaning for word. Funny thing is the Greek word for Dictionary is Lexilogio, which is a combination of two words Lexi (word) and logio (logos = reason/intellect) so you can't say that lexilogio means wordword it means word-intellect, and the purpose of a dictionary is for the knowledge of words. The ironic thing is though, St John of Damascus who apparently had a high position during one of the Khalifa's reign during 747(?) is that he translated the Arabic word for Word from Quran's verses as 3:45 and 4:171 as Logos into the Greek. Strangely enough though, he was a scholar of Christianity whose opinion of Islam was that Islam was a heretic form of Christianity and as we all know that's incorrect and not what the Quran refers to its self, for it does not call its self Christianity. He was probably the earliest critic of Islam, of course who knows how this man was allowed to function as he did while working for the Khalif.

I hope you find this information useful and I hope all is well insha'Allah

yalla salaam

Noor Adeen

http://www.answering-christianity.com/john1_1.htm