John 1:1- ignored by context, as well as the rest of John!
Comments
-
What part of the statement do you not understand?
-
For your consideration on John 1:1:
When we look at a passage, we must remember that there are original words with many meanings. e.g., The Greek word logos, translated "Word" in John 1:1, is an example of one of these words with many meanings. Logos signifies:
- First, the word by which the "inward thought is expressed."
- Second, "the inward thought and reason itself."
From these basic concepts come many definitions illustrated by various renderings of the word in the Bible itself, for example:
- "Saying" (John 21:23)
- "Speech" (1 Cor. 2:1)
- "Treatise" (Acts 1:1)
- "Utterance" (1 Cor. 1:5)
With this array of meanings, a translator must select the one that he believes describes the thought of the original writer most accurately. John 1:1 is hard to decide.
The translation "Word," which appears in many versions, is to many, largely incomprehensible. "Treatise" would be a better definition, for Jesus came to declare (literally, give an exegesis of) the Father (John 1:1S).
- Men who saw and heard Jesus was reading a "treatise," an "account," a "speech" on the character of the Father.
- Jesus was how God's inward thought and character were expressed to humanity in the language men could understand.
I hope this helps everyone? CM
-
Not supplying the resource for the material you quote any more?
https://adventistbiblicalresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/Problems-in-Bible-Translations.pdf
pg. 42-43 Original Words With Many Meanings
-
Thanks. I hope the general point is understood to help bring clarity to John 1:1. CM
-
@BroRando, you gave these translations above Additional Translations:
“The Word was in the beginning, and the word was with God, ”—The New Testament in an Improved Version, 1808, edited by Thomas Belsham, based on a New Testament translation by William Newcome.
“In the beginning the Word existed. The Word was with God, ”—The Bible—An American Translation, 1935, by J.M.P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed.
“The Logos existed in the very beginning, the Logos was with God,”—The Bible—Containing the Old and New Testaments, 1950, by James Moffatt.
“In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God. ”—The Authentic New Testament, 1958, by Hugh J. Schonfield.
@C Mc says, I assume you gave them to prove Jesus was "a god"= a created being. The first reference full title:
- The New Testament: in an improved version upon the basis of Archbishop Newcome's new translation, with a corrected text, and notes critical and explanatory by Newcome, William, 1729-1800; Belsham, Thomas, 1750-1829; Wait, Thomas Baker, 1762-1830. prt; Unitarian Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge and the Practice of Virtue; Massachusetts Bible Society
@BroRando, are these the sources the translators consulted to develop the NWT? CM
-
"are these the sources the translators consulted to develop the NWT? CM
@BroRando, responded:
It's speaking about the Deity of Christ which triniatians [Trinitarians] reject.
By anyone's standards, @BroRando, you didn't answer the question. I know you have been taught and you teach this to others. These evasive-avoidant tactics may work at the neighborhood doors, but you are online. These tactics are exposed for what they are: shameful and unnecessary. Please answer the question if you may. CM
-
@BroRando & @theMadJW, In John 1:1. The text reads:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (NRSV; see also KJV, RSV, NIV, NASB etc.).
Why do the Jehovah's Witnesses insist on translating the last clause of this verse, "and the Word was a god"? The JWs are obsessed with making Christ's divinity inferior to the Father since the Father created Him and made Him a subordinate god. It's clear for all to see the undeniable truth is that the Greek of John 1:1 does not allow for the JWs' translation of the text.
Bruce M. Metzger makes the following key observations concerning The Jehovah's Witnesses' interpretation of John 1:1:
"In the New World Translation [used by Jehovah's Witnesses] the opening verse of the Gospel according to John is mistranslated as follows:’ Originally the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.' A footnote which is added to the first word, 'Originally,’ reads 'Literally, "In (At) a beginning."`
- By using here the indefinite article 'a' the translators have overlooked the well-known fact that in Greek grammar nouns may be definite for various reasons, whether or not the Greek definite article is present.
- A prepositional phrase, for example, where the definite article is not expressed, can be quite definite in Greek, in John 1:1.
- The customary translation, 'In the beginning was the Word,' is therefore to be preferred to either alternative suggested by the New World translators.
Bruce M. Metzger further states: "Far more pernicious in this same verse is the rendering, '. . .and the Word was a god,' with the following footnote: ' "A god." In contrast with "the God." ' It must be stated quite frankly that, if the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists. In view of the additional light which is available during this age of Grace, such a representation is even more reprehensible than were the heathenish, polytheistic errors into which ancient Israel was so prone to fall.
"As a matter of solid fact, however, such a rendering is a frightful mistranslation. It overlooks entirely an established rule of Greek grammar which necessitates the rendering, '. . . and the Word was God.' Some years ago Dr. Ernest Cadman Colwell of the University of Chicago pointed out in a study of the Greek definite article that, 'A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb. . . . The opening verse of John's Gospel contains one ofthe many passages where this rule suggests the translation of a predicate as a definite noun. The absence of the article [before Theos] does not make the predicate indefinite or qualitative when it precedes the verb; it is indefinite in this position only when the context demands it. The context makes no such demand in the Gospel of John, for this statement cannot be regarded as strange in the prologue of the gospel which reaches its climax in the confession of Thomas [John 20:28, 'My Lord and my God'].'"
@BroRando, why the dishonesty? JWs adding to the Bible to make a bias point is equivalent to being spiritually criminal. @theMadJW, were you aware of this addition? Recruit members for the Kingdom Hall, but don't tamper with the Sacred Scriptures to accomplish your goal.
More on the latter text later. Let this soak in for better understanding. CM
SOURCES:
- Bruce M. Metzger, The Jehovah's Witnesses and Jesus Christ, pp. 74, 75; quoting E. C. Colwell, "A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament," Journal of BiblicalLiterature, Lit (1933), 12-21.
- B. M. Metzger, "On theTranslation of John 1:1," Expository Times, LXIII (1951-52),125f.
- C. F. D. Moule, The Language of the New Testament, Inaugural Lecture, delivered at Cambridge University on May 23,1952, pp. 12-14.
-
In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. (John 1:1) (In) the Beginning can also be rendered (From) the Beginning. Do your own research.
The word Beginning ascribes to whom? God or the Word? In the Beginning was the Word.
Even though trintarians proclaim God has a Beginning, this is not accurate. God is ETERNAL. which means God ALWAYS EXISTED. Beginning is a feminie noun that points to a Creation... has being brought forth and begotten with labors.
Even though trinitarians procalim God was begotten and brought forth as with labor pangs is also untrue. God always existed. Now the definition of Beginning:
Strong's Concordance
arché: beginning, origin
Original Word: ἀρχή, ῆς, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: arché
Phonetic Spelling: (ar-khay')
Definition: beginning, origin
Usage: (a) rule (kingly or magisterial), (b) plur: in a quasi-personal sense, almost: rulers, magistrates, (c) beginning.
HELPS Word-studies
746 arxḗ – properly, from the beginning (temporal sense), i.e. "the initial (starting) point"; (figuratively) what comes first and therefore is chief (foremost), i.e. has the priority because ahead of the rest ("preeminent").
Now, we can apply this definition to the Word. (Proverbs 8:22) Jesus did not alway exist but he did exsist before the earth was. "So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was." (John 17:5) Now apply HELPS meaning.. properly, from the beginning (temporal sense), i.e. "the initial (starting) point"; (figuratively) what comes first and therefore is chief (foremost), i.e. has the priority because ahead of the rest ("preeminent").
All the angels existed before the world was. WHY? Because there was a Creation of sons of God before the earth was. Before the earth was brought forth and the mountains were born. "O Jehovah, you have been our dwelling place throughout all generations. Before the mountains were born Or you brought forth the earth and the productive land, From everlasting to everlasting, you are God." (Pslams 90:1-2) Do you see how Creation is Being Brought Forth? Like Jesus was brought forth as with labor pangs, being begotten. Notice how all the sons reacted? "When the morning stars joyfully cried out together, And all the sons of God began shouting in applause?" (Job 38:7) Also, notice Jesus anouncement of his identity. "I am the root and the offspring of David and the bright morning star." (Rev 22:16) Also notice that Jehovah Bless his Son bu giving him Great Authority. Jesus approached and spoke to them, saying: “All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth." (Matthew 28:18) "After this I saw another Angel descending from heaven with Great Authority, and the earth was illuminated by His Glory." (Rev 18:1)
All these things point to the Divinty of Jesus Christ, although rejected by trintarians. Notice the second part, "and the Word was with God". Jesus was the FIRST (Proverbs 8:22) to be with God as in being ("preeminent") Has the priority because ahead of the rest. What comes first and therefore is chief (foremost). From the beginning "the initial (starting) point". The beginning of what? CREATION. Jesus is "Firstborn of All Creation" (Col 1:15) Creation is another feminine noun describing the divinity of Jesus Christ.
Strong's Concordance
ktisis: creation (the act or the product)
Original Word: κτίσις, εως, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: ktisis
Phonetic Spelling: (ktis'-is)
Definition: creation (the act or the product)
Usage: (often of the founding of a city), (a) abstr: creation, (b) concr: creation, creature, institution; Always of Divine Work, (c) an institution, ordinance.
So the Firstborn of All Creation or Creatures was of DIVINE WORK. Yes.... ALWAYS! The second part "and the Word was with God" can also be rendered "and the Word was toward God".
Now the last part. "and the Word was a god." There are two Greek Words for God. theos-- in its natural state, is a feminine noun meaning "a god". Scholars know this but are decotive in hiding this fact. Let's look it up:
Strong's Concordance
theos: God, a god
Original Word: θεός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine; Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: theos
Phonetic Spelling: (theh'-os)
Definition: God, a god
Usage: (a) God, (b) a god, generally.
So now you see it in black and white. So what's the other word in Greek that means God? theos-- in its natural state, is a feminine noun meaning "a god" so one would have to change the feminine noun into a maculine noun by rendering a definite article that gives emphasis. We can do that by simply adding ho theos which means 'the God'
The first instance of God is not the same as the second instance of God. First instance ho theos or theon which means "the God" and the second instance simply theos which means "a god". This goes with Isaiah 9:6. Notice 'a child' and "a son" was given to us. Not the child or the son was given to us.
The same with "No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is at the Father’s side is the one who has explained Him." (John 1:18) No man has seen theon or ho theos at any time. But we have seen the monogenēs theos.
Sad though, that trinitarian bibles like the LEB has removed begotten and theos from John 1:18 to hide the Deity of Christ. Could be that deity proves Jesus was begotten in the essence of his Father? I think the answer is in the positive. Deceptive Scoundrels...
Strong's Concordance
theotés: deity
Original Word: θεότης, ητος, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: theotés
Phonetic Spelling: (theh-ot'-ace)
Definition: deity
Usage: deity, Godhead.
HELPS Word-studies
2320 theótēs (a feminine noun derived from 2316 /theós, "God")
-
Post above is a classic case of...
- Do not actually read a post to which you are responding
- Splatter the walls around you with moldy Watchtower straw
- Don't answer questions others ask (we know the Watchtower thought police dictate how this ought to be done)
- Make yourself a poor, meek, persecuted religious person when your Watchtower straw blows away in the wind of God's Word.
- When you don't have an answer, repeat the same discredited malarky you already said ad nauseum
-
Like I said trinitarians don't beleive in the Deity of Christ. It's a play on word for Deity of Gods. The trinity a false and antichristian teaching against Christ. Post your trinity doctrine. STOP EVADING.
Strong's Concordance
theotés: deity
Original Word: θεότης, ητος, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: theotés
Phonetic Spelling: (theh-ot'-ace)
Definition: deity
Usage: deity, Godhead.
-
I accept your lack of engagement and endless plastering of unoriginal Watchtower propaganda as your admission of helpless defeat.
That's ok.
That is a good place to be. When you realize how futile your arguments are, how error-ridden the Watchtower has been, how desperately you need saved by Jesus, then maybe Truth will come to you, and you will be set free.
Let us know when you are ready. We will have a safety net for you.
-
Interesting. What you are calling error ridden comes from the Christendom site called Bible hub. When you back removing God's Name and the removal of Christ and denounce their names, what does that make you?
Does that make you honest and trustworthy?
