John 1:1

These Three are One: The Word He Was Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος.

The challenge with the traditional ordering of this phrase is its abstraction—“In the beginning the Word was.”
Was what? And the "beginning" of what? A saying doesn't get much more ambiguous and useless than this.

The Greek Ἐν means “in” or “within” not "at" and typically implies location in or containment in something. Here, its meaning was extended to “a temporal start”, or even further to “at the beginning of time.” But is John referring to chronological time itself? Where is the beginning of chronos time? If not chronos time, then the beginning of what? The beginning of everything? It is impossible to derive anything rational from such abstraction. That in itself leaves an abyss. If one were to actually seek out a beginning in this context, he will never find anything, only irrational thoughts like "before the beginning there was just God." Theologians from Augustine to modern day professors explain it as the "beginning of reality" or "beginning of time" or "beginning of creation" etc. Some might interpret it as the manifestation of a first ontological principle. The point is, there is no point. It is a completely open-ended "bottomless pit" and that means one may apply any interpretation or speculation they wish, because all we are given is one word to work with: a beginning. This is useless for any productive reasoning or discussion, which is why it's never reasoned through or discussed. It can't be without becoming completely lost. There is nothing there.

The verb ἦν (was) appears three times in this verse. Usually the word "was" is followed by an object. In Revelation 1:4 John writes,

ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος

ὁ ἦν means precisely, "the one he was" as he does not use a participle. The phrase uses a participle, imperfect indicative active, and a participle. Thus the whole clause in Revelation 1:4 is, precisely,

"the one who is, the one he was, and the one who is coming"

Translating an imperfect indicative active "he was" as a participle "he who was" is a falsehood. Even a tiny falsehood, is still a falsehood. If you can't be trusted with the small, can you be trusted with the great?

As the Word, therefore, we can ascertain the idea of "the Word who is, the Word he was being, and the Word who is coming" In these cases the verb ἦν "was" becomes the point of the saying. In the Greek as with any other language, this verb is often not the point but more of a fill word. In non-philosophical discussions, the verb "to be" is used functionally, or colloquially, and can even be left out. But in philosophical discussions, such as is clearly being discussed by John, the verb "to be" is the point of the discourse. And if the verb is the point, it behooves a translator to not fudge it, change it, or ignore it. Thus, the semantics around the usage of the word will be looked at in an entirely different light.

“Within the Head/Origin” (ἀρχή)

The Greek word ἀρχή (Strong’s G746) has various meanings:

•     Head, source, origin
•     Principle, chief, ruler

It is a feminine noun and carries a deeper sense than some abstract chronological starting point.

In Hebrew thought, “beginning” is not a lost moment in linear time but rather a source from which all things flow and to which all things return— a circuit rather than a fixed point.

In the Septuagint (LXX), the Hebrew ראש (rosh, #7218, meaning "head") and תחלה (techillah, #8462, meaning "to bore, pierce") are often translated as ἀρχή.

The definite article ("the") is rarely used with ἀρχή unless referring to a specific authority (e.g., Luke 20:20) or in Revelation (where the term “the Origin/Head” appears three times: Rev. 3:14, 21:6, 22:13).

Usage in Greek Literature

In Greek texts, the genitive phrase τῆς ἀρχῆς ("of the Origin") is common. However, when expressing "from out of the origin", Greek often omits the definite article:

    ἐξ ἀρχῆς ("from out of the origin").

Interestingly, the New Testament never uses ἐξ "from out of" with ἀρχή "origin". Instead, it uses ἀπὸ ("away from") to indicate derivation.

Philosophical Perspective on ἀρχή

The precise meaning of ἀρχή without a definite article is simply "an origin." 

Aristotle, in Rhetoric (1.7.12-13), explores the idea of origin and cause. Note the usage without a definite article:

If there is an origin (ἀρχή), but another is not an origin, or if there is a cause, but another is not a cause, this distinction arises for the same reason: for without a cause and an origin (ἀρχή), it is impossible for anything to exist or come into being.

And among two origins (ἀρχαί), the one that comes from the greater origin (ἀρχή) is greater. Likewise, among two causes, the one from the greater cause is greater. Conversely, among two origins (ἀρχαί), the origin (ἀρχή) of the greater is greater, and among two causes, the cause of the greater is greater.