John 1:1 and the words of JESUS thruout that book!

Koine Greek Biblical text says:

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. (John 1:1 SBLGNT)

In beginning was being The Word, and The Word was being with The God, and God was being The Word. (my literal translation) Thankful for "aha" moment when pondering past time Greek verb tenses, John 1:1 ἦν spelling of εἰμί (to be) is imperfect tense => continuous action in past time. Koine Greek verbal system has three other tenses that can have secondary past time for action. Kind of action is always primary in Koine Greek, which is different than English verbs primarily expressing time of action: past, present, future.

Phrase "God was being The Word" concisely expresses The Word quality was fully being God, but God entity was being more than The Word (applying Greek grammatical rule, known as Colwell's Construction). Hebrew word e-lo-HEEM אֱלֹהִ֜ים God is plural, which includes The Father, The Word, and Breath The Holy (Hebrew plural is a minimum of three as noun spelling also has dual: eyes, ears, ...).

Greek grammar implication is if John 1:1c phrase had been "The God was being The Word", then the text would say complete interchangeability, that is "The God = The Word", which would have corollary posted by @theMadJW on May 12 "Churchianity teaches it to mean that "In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with Jesus, and Jesus WAS Jesus."

Keep Smiling 😊

Unfortunately, this response does not address the particular question I raised regarding how the Greek syntax in the third clause ought to have appeared to express without any doubt for the WT organization that "...the Word was God".

To your response:

Yes, a couple of translations use the word "divine". And yes, "with God" appears once in the second clause of verse 1 and again in verse 2 – a differentiation is made. 

Below, I'll illustrate what I have been searching for from the WT with regard to the third clause in verse 1 utilizing the first statement from your response "The word was DIVINE, as some translations have it."

An if... then... style of argument, only for example, follows:

It has been argued that had John wished to express "divine" he would then have used the available term θεῖος in place of θεὸς; therefore, .... 

The question previously raised, and still to be answered:

As stated earlier in my first post and now again, I find, at least to date, no such type of argument put forward by the WT on the JW website regarding the final clause of verse 1 (i.e., had John instead written cba than abc in this last clause we, the WT, would have rendered θεὸς as "God"; however, this is not the case and we, the WT, retain the translation "a god". 

Is there something like this available anywhere in the WT teaching? 

In response, yes we are talking about scripture – more specifically the grammatical syntax of the last clause of Jn. 1:1 which at this time it would seem remains unaddressed. 

Further, did not the WT provide the NWT and the teaching guides on the scriptures themselves? And is it not from these mentioned sources that the foundation of theological beliefs are derived and communicated to followers which are then passed on by interaction with the general public and through missionary activity?

Had I discovered the definitive answer to my question on the JW website then I would not be asking it of you on this thread.

So then, would it not be appropriate to seek for the answer to my question from a follower of the WT on a thread started by this same follower having "Lets take a MUCH closer look at John 1:1..." in it?

The question is quite simply one of grammatical construction pertaining to how would the NWT translators express "...the Word was God" from the text in the third clause of verse 1. 

 If you come across the answer please let me know.

Greek and English are different one to the other; however, it is the Greek text from which our English NT translations are derived.

In this instance, and as has been communicated in your first response, there are some translation differences regarding the last clause of verse 1: as your response pointed out there are a few translations that render the clause "...the word was DIVINE"; then, there are a few others rendering "...the Word was a god" the most well-known being the NWT; and finally, the majority of English NT translations having "...the Word was God". 

Below is an interesting example of John 1:1 from Joseph Smith's bible translation project (JST 1830-1844).  For anyone interested this is available online at the LDS website.  https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/jst/jst-john/1?lang=eng

1. "In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God"

As can be seen from the above examples there is some difference in rendering the last clause, and in the JST immediately above a trainwreck ensues for the entire verse. 

The Greek text of this clause has not changed nor would any of the translators claim it has. What has of course changed is the clausal meaning being conveyed explicitly by each of the individual renderings.

Regarding the words of Jesus: all of scripture is God-breathed (2Tim. 3:16) not only just the words attributed to Jesus.

My answer to that is given in my response; however, in short, Yes and No. I believe the affirmative is reflected in my answer regarding Greek to English pertaining to Jn. 1:1; however, the negative is reserved for the proposed "safe bet..." and "...what Jesus taught" line of reasoning which will not bring with it the definitive answer to my one and only question.

I didn't ask about the number of beings referenced in John 1.1. I asked what I believed @Pages asked: In the view of NWT translators or those who endorse their translation of John 1.1, what group of Greek words would have to construct the final clause of John 1.1 in order for that clause CORRECTLY to be translated, "and the Word was God"? If you don't want to address that specific question - which is the ONLY question I'm asking - then please say so directly. It's a waste of your and my energies for me to ask, you to evade, and then for us to repeat.

Repeating question for @the_MadJw => In the view of NWT translators or those who endorse their translation of John 1.1, what group of Greek words would have to construct the final clause of John 1.1 in order for that clause CORRECTLY to be translated, "and the Word was God"? 

Koine Greek does not have an indefinite article, which is different than English.

Both English and Koine Greek have a numeric one. First use of "one" in John 1 is in verse 3 LEB => All things came into being through him, and apart from him not one thing came into being that has come into being. (italicized words in LEB show English translator addition for smooth English rendering)

John 1:3 Darby => All things received being through him, and without him not one thing received being which has received being.

To me, an implication of John 1:3 is wisdom received being through him, The Word.

Koine Greek grammar rules have helped me appreciate John 1:1 quality of The Word fully being eternal God, but One unique eternal God was/is/will be more than The Word.

Belief "John 1:1 has a reference to TWO Gods." simply contradicts "no God" in Isaiah 44:6 Darby => Thus saith Jehovah, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, Jehovah of hosts: I am the first, and I am the last, and beside me there is no God.

My belief is Jesus speaking eternal יהוה truth in Revelation 22:13 (Darby) when he said "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."

NO, I believe One unique God has three distinct voices. Caveat is my answer only expresses my belief so does not answer for all thread posters.

Keep Smiling 😊

@the_MadJw

@Bill_Coley is quite right in his response to this – there has been no request for you to quote from the NWT or any other translation for that matter. That would not itself provide the answer to the actual question at hand. The question revolves solely on what does the WT officially say, if anything, the Greek wording of the third clause needs to be in order to express "...the Word was God".      

This question I first asked at the beginning of this thread has now been re-phrased on several occasions by myself, then Bill, and now more recently @KS4J has expressed interest in hearing an answer as well.   

Minor quibbles once again, wouldn't the majuscule, or uncial, style of script used be considered uppercase Greek?

Ⲉⲛⲁⲣⲭⲏⲏⲛⲟⲗⲟⲅⲟⲥⲕⲁⲓⲟⲗⲟⲅⲟⲥⲏ̅

ⲡⲣⲟⲥⲧⲟⲛⲑ̅ⲛ̅·ⲕⲁⲓⲑ̅ⲥ̅ⲏⲛⲟⲗⲟⲅⲟⲥ (John 1:1– Codex Alexandrinus – early 5th century)

As opposed to the minuscule writing style below.

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. (John 1:1)

"majuscule, in calligraphy, capital, uppercase, or large letter in most alphabets, in contrast to the minuscule, lowercase, or small letter." (majuscule. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/majuscule)

How exactly does "Elohim..." answer the specific question that has been asked numerous times of you in this thread regarding the last clause of Jn. 1:1?