Pronoun implication about Logos in John 1:1-5

Question

Please help track the pronouns and antecedents in John 1:1-5.

In the Greek, do the “He” and the “him”’s that refer to the Logos in 1-4 definitively indicate personhood/agency, or could the antecedent possibly be an “it”? (Without reference to any greater context at the moment)

What is the gender of Logos, and what does it imply about the options for translating the pronouns?

John 1 NIV:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.

¹ ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος ² οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν ³ πάντα δι᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν ὃ γέγονεν ⁴ ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων

οὗτος is a bit different as I learned in the links below. More like “that one”. We don’t need to discuss unless it impacts a question.

John 1:2 KJV

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

Lastly, the pronoun in 5 refers to the light, that was the life, that was in the Logos. αὐτὸ was again used there. If light φῶς is masculine, then technically a translation decision was made to use “it” rather than “him” for the light. And if light is feminine, then the translator made an error (I don’t suspect that; only say it to check my understanding). That thinking seem right? If yes, light is masculine right?

John 1:4-5 NIV

4 In him [Logos] was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

None of my questions were answered in any of these questions or their answers, but they helped me ask it better: The relationship between wisdom and light ; Who is, or are the correct referent(s) of the pronouns in John 1:3-4? ; Since the Word received life in John 1:3-4 per the UBS Greek text, can the prologue also support the Word was eternal?

Answer 1

The Greek pronouns in John 1:1-5 are as follows:

• V2: Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν. // Οὗτος is demonstrative masculine singular (= "that man") and refers to Logos/Word
• V3: πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν ὃ γέγονεν. // αὐτοῦ is genitive masculine singular (= "his") and refers to Logos/Word
• V4: ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν, καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων. // αὐτῷ is dative masculine singular (= "in/to him") and refers to Logos/Word
• V5: καὶ τὸ φῶς ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ φαίνει, καὶ ἡ σκοτία αὐτὸ οὐ κατέλαβεν. // αὐτὸ is accusative neuter (= "it") and refers to "light" because it is neuter.

Thus, every pronoun in John 1:1-5 is masculine singular whose antecedent is Logos/Word which is masculine singular except for the last one which refer to the neuter "light". Whether Logos/Word is a person or not is irrelevant to the discussion above but is grammatically masculine singular.

The Greek for Logos is masculine, and light is neuter.

The pronoun must agree with the antecedent in gender and number. Greek has perfectly serviceable set of masc, fem, neuter (="it") pronouns. The context aside for a moment, we could have translated the he’s and him’s in v3 and v4 as “it” instead - in English, but not in Greek. For example if we thought Logos was an object (just hypothetically mind you; I’m not suggesting that interpretation can be supported). Similarly, the “it” αὐτὸ in v5 that refers to “light” φῶς, could have been translated as “him” in English if the meaning had motivated that.

Answer 2

The pronouns in English cannot indicate agency and personhood. The description of the entity shows agency or personhood. The Holy Spirit was often translated as neuter 'it' in the traditional Bible versions, until the modern Bible translator's got insecure and threatened by the JWs and forced everyone to use a masculine pronoun for the spirit, when we all know that a spirit is neuter gender in English. Same way when referring to the spirit as dove, the neuter is used, but that doesn't mean the dove is not a person. Demons being personal are typically given neuter "it". So, it is good at least they use "it" for the light, and not forcing the twisted modern agenda that "it" may threaten their dogma.

There is no problem if you use "it" for the word, but since English has a loose ambiguous rule for the grammatical gender, it would be better to use the masculine for the word to maintain consistency. If we check the bible version comparison on biblegateway, we find that the Geneva Bible 1599 used "it" for the word .

John 1:2-4

2 This same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made.

4 In it was life, and that life was the light of men.