@manilamerc I need to find it. Tell you what. I'll try to find it and upload the entire episode before the weekend is out. Please remember this was back in the 70's so the quality is not the best. God bless
Hey Mark, perhaps you could entertain me for a bit by explaining why it says 'ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν' in John 1:1b instead of simply saying 'ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς θεὸ'?
@october31st1517 There is only one God according to Jesus at John 17:3 and that God is the Father. This is supported by Paul at 2 Cor 8:6 "to us there is one God, the Father". Paul also calls Jesus the "exact copy of his (Gods) very being" and the "Image of the invisible God" In that case, in the true sense of what the word God means, a powerful one, he must therefore be of divine nature. The video calls JWs "dishonest" in their version of John 1:1 many trinitarian scholars do not agree
@ October31st1517 He mentions Dr. William Barclay who opposed the NWT and in particular their translation of John 1:1. That is true, he hammered it. 20 years later he said that "the Word was a god is a possible translation for John 1:1 Why did he not translate this verse as "the Word was God" in his NT?. He saw what many other trinitarian translators and scholars have seen. If you say "the Word was God" then what you are saying is the Word was ALL of God?
@steveparadise1 This would only be true if λογος was preceded by the article. Then you would have an equation in the text and thus giving weight to an translation that would promote a oneses view not a Unitarian view. The passage simply states "και θεος ην ο λογοs", which literally translated is " and God was the Word". "the Word" is the subject of the sentence, which is the reason it's translated first in English followed by the imperfect form of "ειμι", "ην". emphasis over order.
@October31st1517 By claiming that the JWs plucked "a god" out of the air to support their doctrine. JWs were not the first to translate John 1:1 this way. And they are not alone in seeing that John himself made a distinction between the two mentions of "theos" in this verse. It is not that important where else in scripture the definite article is used before God. The point is at John 1:1 he does, and for a reason. They give no consideration to a valid alternative at John 1:1
@steveparadise1 maybe, but it would be a far cry to say JW are not bias as well. It's the most bias translation that's been produced. I would encourage you to read "crisis of conscience' by Raymond Franz. It's a free PDF download and he talks in depth about how the text was abused in the NWT. He was a JW almost his whole life
@nyguy9A I dont get why they make it so hard. they keep thinking we are saying that GOD the Father is Jesus..they simply do not understand what the trinity is.
@rhdtv2002 The creative prosses by god though jesus heb 1: 2 has at the end of these days spoken to us by means of a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the systems of things.
@jayandersons jesus does not know the day and the hour, jesus said the father is greater than I, jesus said why do you call me good?, John 5: 18,19 jesus said I cannot do anything by my own initiative, you want a thousand more quotes?
@jayandersons That Scripture is referring to what the barbarians thought of the Apostle Paul after a venomous snake had bitten him and he did not perish. A reply with all humility, with reference to the immediate context of Scripture from Acts 28:1 - 6.
@Proverbs1533 you missed my point the indefanet actacle (the letter A) they claim it dosent belong at john 1:1 or the thought of a god but there it is in there bible. or a man , a woman , a ect...
@Proverbs1533 you are right about john 1:6 . but john 1:1 is THE GOD and god from greek interliner god is large caps and spelled differnt then small caps thers a vid on it i'll send
Jesus has a mind, learning, forgetting and being limited like any other child of his age; loving God as Father and feeling filial obedience to the Father; praying, weeping and being tempted like anyone else; feeling agony in Gethsemane and perhaps even abandonment by God on the cross.
This is NOT someone who knew himself to be Almighty God, though he could have conceived himself as Messiah and Son of God. God acted in him, raising his mental capacities to new heights of inspiration.
Assume that: This in John 1:1 The Word was 'a god" in Verse 3 It says, The Word created ALL THINGS and NOTHING came into existence apart from him. So the same 'a god' has to be indeed God in essence over all creation, and 'a god' can be seen as referring the that the Word was indeed a PERSON that person being identified as GOD.Thank you either way you have John is telling us God came in the flesh.
Dr. A.T. Robertson, the greatest Koine Greek scholar of modern times, says in "Word Pictures of the New Testament" regarding Jn. 1:1: "And the Word was God (καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying ὁ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. That would mean that all of God was expressed in ὁ λόγος and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (ὁ λόγος) and the predicate without it (θεὸς)...."
Dr. A.T. Robertson, the greatest Koine Greek scholar of modern times, says, "So in John 1:1 theos en ho logos the meaning has to be the Logos was God...."--"Short Grammar", p. 279 Dr. Donald Guthrie, Greek scholar, states, "The absence of the article with Theos has misled some into thinking that the correct understanding of the statement would be that 'the Word was a god' (or divine), but this is GRAMMATICALLY INDEFENSIBLE [emph. mine] since Theos is a predicate."--"N.T. Theology", p. 327
Exodus 6:3 And [ I appeared ] unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by [the name of] God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.
But yet the bible say's no man has seen the father at anytime, so who was it that was ALMIGHTY GOD that appeared to Abraham?
56Abraham, your father, was glad that he might see my day; and he saw, and did rejoice.' 57The Jews, therefore, said unto him, `Thou art not yet fifty years old, and Abraham hast thou seen?' it was jesus read vs 58
And Jehovah appeareth unto him among the oaks of Mamre, and he is sitting at the opening of the tent, about the heat of the day;
jehovah God appeared to Abraham again. but yet the bible say's No man has seen the father at anytime, but yet Jehovah was seen by man, unless it was jesus the second person of the Trinity, the pre-incarnate christ
Don't you love the use of the word "dangerous"? Like the bible is going to blow up, or bite you. Actually, it refers to any reasoning that does not agree with the speaker.
Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
Isa 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.
However, you cannot use the grammar alone to decide whether it is "God" or "a god." I've studied Koine Greek for four years now.
Besides that, the Sahidic Coptic translations have shown even more evidence for the translation "a god."
Side note: If you want to be taken seriously, don't act so childish and immature. A few comments down: "I win." Winning an argument or debate is never by words alone, it's by information behind those words.
@iknowimalive But the point that Dr. Robert is making is that the argument is inconsistent. Besides, Dr. James White says that when Theos doesn't have a definite article in front, it actually means that Theos becomes translated as "Divinity" referring to God's nature. So it becomes, "And the Word was Divinity."
But i have to agree. "I win" is an immature statement to end with for an argument.
this is to stut988uwxk,, You are AVOIDING THE POINT...You either believe in ONE GOD< or two gods, No matter how much you argue and fuss about it, you have put yourself in a spot,,, YOU EITHER BELIEVE THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD, OR IN YOUR OPINION THERE ARE TWO...YOU DON'T GET TO HAVE IT BOTH WAYS, ALL THE ARGUING IS POINTLESS.....ISAIAH 43:10-11
1 Corinthinans 8:5.6 "For even though there are those who are called “gods,” whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” there is actually to us one God the Father.."
The angels are also referred to as “godlike ones.” (Psalm 8:5; Hebrews 2:7). The apostle Paul described the Devil as “the god of this system of things.” (2 Corinthians 4:4). Moses is called 'God' (Exodus 7:1) God himself called others "gods" in Psalm 82:1, 6.
@surfinsquirrel2008 But are they gods by nature? (Gal 4:8) Whatever it takes to be God BY NATURE, The Father, The Son, & The Holy Ghost have it, and no one else does..
@October31st1517 1 Corinthians 8:5,6 states very clearly that even though there are many called gods, "there is actually to us ONE GOD the FATHER.." who is above all other gods. No mention of the Son or holy spirit being co-equal with the Father, exactly the opposite. That's ONE Almighty God, the Father, not three.
Thousands of times throughout the Bible, God is spoken of as one person. When he speaks, it is as one undivided individual. The Bible could not be any clearer on this.
@surfinsquirrel2008 But are they gods by nature?(Gal 4:8) Satan is the god of this world, but he is not a "god" by nature. Since attributes of almighty Godship are given to the Father, Son (Rom 9:5 Col 2:9) & to the HG,(Acts 13:2, Heb 9:14) I must accept what the bible says. Also 1 Cor 8:5-6 says that the one Lord is Jesus Christ. Does that mean that the Father is not Lord because the One Lord is JC? You're having problems Hermenuticly?
@October31st1517 1Cor. 8:6 itself answers that very statement you have made; just because someone like Christ is called “god” it does not mean that they are inherently God by nature.
Christ is NOT given the attributes of Almighty God. When we look at several of the primary attributes of Almighty God: omniscience, omnipotence, imutability/eternality and receiving worship, the Scriptures show that none of these attributes are intrinsic to Christ. Christ is not “by nature” God.
@surfinsquirrel2008 Revelation would tend to disagree with you. Jesus calls himself the Alpha and the Omega. Who else in the scriptures calls themselves the Alpha and the Omega? Jesus also identified himself as the I AM, but again, you would never know that by reading the New World Mistranslation.
@surfinsquirrel2008 Jesus is Jehovah Gods son he came down to earth and spilled his bloods for our sins(plus he also preached his father Jehovah God name and who he is), dont you think thats why JW go around preaching and knocking on ppls door...umm do you do that? i bet you dont....didnt you read that part you must of forgot 0_0 yeah um dude stfu you dont have your facts straight for shit.....or you cna continue so i can ripp you apart with the TRUE facts. <3
That is the greek rendering of that verse. It uses the word θεὸς (theos/God) to define the Son. The best greek manuscripts use this word to define the Son.
Sheila and others, I pray that you sincerely seek God's truth through his Word. Please consider that Jesus accepted worship. The NWT translates the Greek word for worship as "obesiance" when it refers to Jesus (Matthew 28, Hebrews 1 - just to name a couple of references). Yet the same Greek word they translate as "worship" when it refers to God. This is just one example of the many ways they manipulate scripture to fit their peculiar teachings.
Dr. A.T. Robertson, the greatest Koine Greek scholar of modern times, says, "So in John 1:1 theos en ho logos the meaning has to be the Logos was God...."--"Short Grammar", p. 279 Dr. Donald Guthrie, Greek scholar, states, "The absence of the article with Theos has misled some into thinking that the correct understanding of the statement would be that 'the Word was a god' (or divine), but this is GRAMMATICALLY INDEFENSIBLE [emph. mine] since Theos is a predicate."--"N.T. Theology", p. 327
But an prevebal nonarticular PN (THEOS) can be translated as indefinite/qualitive or as definite,so the context is the determing factor not a priory.How does the fact that "THEOS" is the predicate, mean that "a god " is indefensible?the Great Scholar Murray J. Harris:"According, from the point of view of grammar alone,[theos en ho logos]could be rendered "the Word was a god."-Jesus As God, 1992, pp.60. Again anyone saying that gramatically "a god" is wrong , is being dishonest and/or naive.
Again, you are NOT a Greek scholar, you are NOT qualified to give a Greek grammatical opinion. W.E. Vine, who is both, tells us that "a god was the Word" is the literal rendering, but that to translate it that way is "entirely misleading", because other grammatical rules come into play, which I've cited. You Russellites know a litte Greek, but don't know much of it; Alexander Pope said, "A little learning is a dangerous thing." Give it up, man; you're embarrassing yourself.
1st of Murray Harris was a trinitarian. In the same publication he states:
In itself John 1:1a ... John implies the ETERNAL preexistence of the Word. He who existed `in the beginning' before creation was himself without a beginning and therefore UNCREATED. There was no time when he did not exist. John is hinting that all speculation about the origin of the Logos is pointless. (Jesus as God p. 54.
It is neither SCHOLARLY nor REASONABLE to translate John 1:1 "a god. Dr. JR Mantey.
Quote "no means an objective rendering " Really?I nwould say that the
the Word was God" is also bias and wrong,theology DOES play a role. Also "basic tenets of Greek grammar" and "exemplifies the rule that the subject is to be determined by its having the article when the predicate is anarthrous " what "RULE" and we know what the subject is at John 1:1c "Ho logos" what are you trying to say?A
I'm not saying anything; Greek scholar W.E. Vine says that to translate John 1:1 as "a god was the Word" is "entirely misleading". You may try to escape that in true Russellite fashion, but you are NOT a Greek scholar, you are NOT qualified to give a Greek grammatical opinion; he is. Again, the greatest Koine Greek scholar of modern times, Dr. A.T. Robertson, says that the correct translation is, "and the Word was God". So says Greek scholars Young, Darby, and Berry as well.
As you said "I'm not saying anything"? ofcourse you're not saying it,but you quoting others to say what "you are saying". Again gramatically "the Word was a god" is correct. You have not showed me how it is incorrect,perhaps you could show me from A.T. Robertson,Darby and berry,how gramatically it is incorrect.
Again, you Russellites know a little Greek, but don't know much of it. Greek scholar W.E. Vine says, "to translate it literally, 'a god was the Word,' is entirely misleading." You people try to apply a general rule of Greek grammar to a specific text (Jn. 1:1) while ignoring other Greek grammatical rules, and it doesn't work that way. You are NOT a Greek scholar, you are NOT qualified to give a Greek opinion. Robertson, Vine, Young, Darby, and Berry are, and they ALL say YOU'RE WRONG.
You said "while ignoring other Greek grammatical rules".What rules?You do NOT any,if you do let's see tem.2nd Your quote "W.E. Vine says, "to translate it literally, 'a god was the Word,' is entirely misleading" but that is based on THEOLGY, in other words his determining factor is his theology. Anyone saying that "and the Word was a god" is gramatically incorrect in very wrong" Countess charts in this video are completely worthless,because they only apply in a interlinear.
1st off, most greek scholars agree that grammatically and contextually you cannot translate Johnn 1:1 "a god". That is FACT. Even your society realizes this. This is why they wish to keep secret the names of the translators of the NWT. This whole preserving humility reason is nothing but an excuse. 2ndly, the reason you agree with an "a god" translation is because your theology mandates that assumption.
You can translate it "a god",and that is contextually the only possible biblically based fact,that is not assuming trinitarianiam. Either the Word was HO Theos(the Trinity) or he was a different THEOS. John distinguishes both not in personal terms Father and Son,but as HO THEOS and THEOS. The "Even your society realizes this" what they realise is written above,and 2nd it is based on theology that trinitarians ttranslate ""was GOD".
You have failed to show how it can be translated "a god". I agree that HO THEOS and THEOS prove that the Father and the Son are seperate PERSONS. However, here is where your ASUMPTION comes in. Because they in fact are 2 seperate persons they must be 2 different gods. WRONG! They both share the same divine nature and hence are the same God. In fact the context(John 1:3)shows that the Word is the creator of ALL THINGS. So contextually as well as grammatically an"a god" translation is erroneous.
Randolph O. Yeager says, "Only sophomores in Greek grammar are going to translate...'and the Word was a God.' The article with 'logos', shows that 'ho logos' is the subject of the verb 'en' and the fact that 'theos' is without the article designates it as the predicate nominative. The emphatic position of 'theos' demands that we translate '...and the Word was God.' Jn. is not saying as Jeh. Wit. are fond of teaching that Jesus was only one of many Gods. He is saying precisely the opposite."
The emphatic position of 'theos' demands that we translate '...and the Word was God" again that is his opinion and it is deliberately a lie because word order in greek is irrelevant gramatically.You can quote all the bias Commentors and grammarians you want ,but the 3 facts remain clear "word order is unimportant" 2,gramatically it is correct and most importantly,3 it is contextually and monotheistically the only possible translation.
Again, you are NOT a Greek scholar, you are NOT qualified to give a Greek grammatical opinion. Greek scholars Berry, Darby, Mantey, Vine, Young, and Dr. A.T. Robertson, the greatest Koine Greek grammarian of modern times, ALL say that the correct translation is, "and the Word was God." You can't dispute it, you're not a scholar. Give it up, Russellite; you're "toast".
Famous quote "All will know that you are my disciples,if you have love among each other". also "Pray for those who persecute YOU for my sake". Your Quote "Give it up, Russellite; you're "toast"." Very cristian attitude,so you just want to argue and not discusse amicably.Very And again they translate "was God" based on there predispossed view of a Triune God.God Bless.
Again, you are NOT a Greek scholar, you are NOT qualified to give a grammatical opinion. Robertson, Berry, Darby, Mantey, and Vine are, and they ALL say YOU'RE WRONG. Your desperation is showing horribly, Russellite; you can't win the debate, so you try to present yourself as the victim. You didn't give these Scriptures: "Ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." (Jude 3) "If ye believe not that I am, ye shall die in your sins." (Jn. 8:24)
You just shot yourself in the foot. You just stated "it is...monotheistically the only possible translation."
You are ASSUMING 1 God equals 1 PERSON. And this is erronous.
Monotheism is the belief in the EXISTENCE of ONE GOD. Something that trinitarianism holds to.
However here really is the big difference. You reject the trinity, not because the bible doesn't teach it. But because the faithful & discreet slave TELLS YOU that the bible doesn't teach it. They are your final authrty.
All you have are sophomoric attacks ,you are just showing you true colors. I will not argue with unchristian persons. John 17:3 and 1 Cor. 8:6 all other apllication of "THEOS" to Jesus should be viewed with reference to them,Biblical Monotheisism,not preconceived view of the CHRIST.
The only thing that's sophomoric about this debate is your lack of Greek knowledge; so says Greek scholar Randolph O. Yeager. You didn't bother to mention Mk. 2:5-7 and Jn. 10:30-33 when you cited Jn. 17:3, and you also didn't bother to mention Jn. 1:1-3 when you cited I Cor. 8:6. You are engaging in a logical fallacy with Jn. 17:3; Jesus didn't say that ONLY THE FATHER was the true God, He said that the Father was the ONLY TRUE GOD. He simply identified the Father as God.
You should know that Jehovah comes from the verb form of "I AM", the same that Jesus said when He said "before Abraham was, I AM". Jehovah was never used in the Hebrew text (Torah) but in the Septuagint. To deny Jesus being God is telling Jesus Himself "You lie"
To add to that is v5 where is specifically says that christ shared glory with the Father before the world was. Isaiah writes that he will not share his glory with another. This is something only God can do, hence Jesus being God. It matters when you read everything in it's context.
@October31st1517 Mark.12:[32] And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:
According to the bible there is only one true God, any other god is not a true or not the true and living God.
The scripture clearly says there is ONE GOD and there is NONE OTHER BUT : " HE :" not HIM, but HE.
@October31st1517 The bible says clearly there is only one true God.
1tim.3:[16] And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
Who is God with a capital " G " that was manifest in the flesh ?
Jesus is God, and there is only one true God, without controversy, without arguing God was manifest in the flesh.
@October31st1517 what you are basically saying is that 3 persons make that one God and so when we are praying we should say God who is the Father who is Jehovah, and the Son who is Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost who is What? You see I am one of Jehovah's Witness who believe that Jesus Christ has to be honored as the Bible tells us as the Son of God, that is if you believe in the Bible and what it says not just one scripture and just ignore the rest - read John 3:16 and it will help
@00sheilagreasley100 Here is your problem. You are ASSUMING unitarianism. Let's start off with this. Can you show me from the bible that God is 1 PERSON. Understand my question please. I did not ask if there was 1 God.Trinitarianism already accepts this. I asked if you could show me that this 1 God is 1 Person?
W.E. Vine is qualified to give a Greek grammatical opinion, you are NOT. Again, what did he say? He said, "To translate it literally, 'a god was the Word," is entirely misleading. Moreover, that "the Word" is the subject of the sentence, exemplifies the RULE [emphasis mine] that the subject is to be determined by its having the article when the predicate is anarthrous (without the article)." Vine gives you a RULE in this quote; your ignorance of Greek is showing badly.
@briancook007 Where do you get off calling people ignorant - you know to much greek that simple common sense does not exist in your book - Jesus was not educated but simple common sense is what he uses and yet the scholars of his day he put to shame - use your brains and you will see that Jesus and Jehovah are 2 different entities - The son worships the father - The son himself subjected himself to the father
@00sheilagreasley100, I never called anyone "ignorant", ma'am. The New World Translation is a perversion of the Greek language. Greek scholars Berry, Darby, Mantey, Vine, Young, and Dr. A.T. Robertson, the greatest Koine Greek grammarian of modern times, ALL say that the correct translation of Jn. 1:1 is "and the Word was God". Whom did Isaiah see in Isa. chapter 6? He saw Jehovah (vs. 5). John says that Isaiah saw Jesus, proving Jesus IS Jehovah (Jn. 12:41).
Hi Sheila - Please cite one Scripture where the Bible addresses Jesus in an act of worship toward His Father, and I will consider what you are saying here.
Sorry jrichard1977 for taking so long to answer - My father was in the hospital with heart/kidney problems and then he had to travel to Barbados to run some tests - he is right now in Barbados -
If you can read Luke 4:8 and then read John 8;49,50 where Jesus said he is not seeking glory for himself - there are other scriptures which i will look up and then get back to you
All i know i was studying with jws for 2 years,but never felt at peace.Felt Jesus not given his status ans the holy spirit absent from thier worships.They are very nice people i love them ,but there is no salvation ,nothing without Jesus.Why so concerned about who is who?What did God say about Jesus? Noone can come to God without the son?
Hes not Michael the archangel or any angel etc.He is a part of God!
So are you saying that gramatically John 1:1c "a god" is wrong.
I am not. The vast majority of greek scholars are.
Dr. Paul L. Kaufman "The Jehovah's Witness people evidence an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets of Greek grammar in their mistranslation of John 1:1."
Dr. Anthony Hoekema,
New World Translation of the Bible is by no means an objective rendering of the sacred text into Modern English, but is a biased translation..."
I have already answered what part don't you understand. You appreciate my comments,without understanding?Perhaps you can explain to me,without using the terms Father and Son,why it's correct from John1:1a to 1:1c without assuming trinitarianms to translate it "the Word was God"
Jesus says that only his father is the (John 17:3)true GOD and Apostle Paul confirms for him the ONE God is the Father(1 Corithians 8:6)Unitariaism is the result of Jesus and Pauls teachings, True Monotheism.Only by assuming trinitarianism can you try to circumvent these passages and the Scriptures as a whole. Is Jesus THEOS,of course!Biblically he is my qualified THEOS.
(Heb 1:8, Col 2:9 I already have answered below and aslo you ignored John 17"3 and 1 Cor 8:6.You already beleve in the trinity so in you view you are not assuming it.
Again it is all about how,that is, in what sence do you give to the "THEOS". I hope your video will be neutral and rely on grammer alone and not theolgy. As I said based on grammer alone John 1:1c can be translate 'was a god" or "was god/GOD.Don't make a poor video like this one,it makes you look uneducated. I'll be the first to comment I hope,though since I have not seen one serious videos by anyone, I don't expect much.
Would you like to debate me on whether God is 1 Person or 3 on a public forum. In a gentlemanly manner that is.I notice you keep running from this because you are NOT QUALIFIED to say whether "John 1:1c can be translate 'was a god" or "was god/GOD." If anyone is uneducated it is you because of your final authority. The watchtower bible and tract society.
It is clear that Jesus Christ is not God Almighty as the scripture at 1 Corinthians Chapter 15 verse 28 makes it clear that Jesus Christ will be made subject to Almighty God. Not only that, but at Colossians 1:15 says that Jesus is the image of the invisible God and the first born of all creation. So God created Jesus at the beginning of his ways.
1 Corinthians 15: 25For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27For he "has put everything under his feet."[c] Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all."
Dr. A.T. Robertson states in "Word Pictures" in his comments on Jn. 1:1 that the correct translation is "and the Word was God". Those who say otherwise are therefore "outgunned", as he was the greatest Koine Greek scholar of modern times.
Another Giant Scholar Dr.Murray J Haris states "from the point of view of grammer alone θεον και θεος ην ο λογος could be rendered "the Word was a god". All Scholars recognize that John 1:1c can be translated that way,why they dogmatically prefer the contradictory "the Word was God" is due to Theology alone.
W.E. Vine, noted Greek scholar, in his "Expository Dictionary", says, "to translate it literally, 'a god was the Word', is entirely misleading." So, you Russellites prove once again that you know a little Greek, but don't know much of it. "A little learning is a dangerous thing."--Alexander Pope
Again, Dr. A.T. Robertson, the greatest Koine Greek scholar of modern times, says in "Word Pictures" that the correct translation is, "and the Word was God".
Again "the word was a god is gramatically correct. The translation "the Word was GOD isTheologically based and contextually wrong.Either Jesus is the "HO THEOS" The trinity or he is a THEOS, John uses the terms HO THEOS and THEOS and NOT Father and Son,this text is so easy if you don't assume trinitarianism and rely on biblically based Unitarian Monotheism,just as Jesus did John 17:3 and Paul 1 Cor.8:6.
From a Trinitarian perspective it isn't contextually wrong, because you simply change the terms to Father and Son from Johns' terms HO THEOS and THEOS.Thanks for calling me a Stafford clone a few days ago,I take it as a praise,but you said it in a unchristian way,which coming from you is no surprise and it makes Jesus sad when people speak like you.Countess charts in the video are completly irrelevant to prove any inconsistency in the NWT. ONLY an interlinear has to follow those those charts.
You are NOT a Greek scholar, you are NOT qualified to give a Greek grammatical opinion. Referring to Jn. 1:1, W.E. Vine, noted Greek scholar, says, "To translate it literally, 'a god was the Word,' is entirely misleading. Moreover, that "the Word" is the subject of the sentence, exemplifies the rule that the subject is to be determined by its having the article when the predicate is anarthrous (without the article)."--"Expository Dictionary", Vol. II, p. 160
"And after 6 days JESUS TOLD HIM WHAT TO DO and in the evening THE YOUTH COMES TO HIM, WEARING A LINEN CLOTH OVER HIS NAKED BODY???" YOUTH MOLESTER!
Missing Fragments from St. Mark's Gospel shows Jesus performing homosexual behavior. A scholar from Columbia University named Morton Smith found manuscript fragments in a monastery near Jerusalem in 1958
Someone erased my comment so I will post it again and take a screen shot as proof. Ok you wrote "It cannot be translated "a god" because there is NO article after the 2nd occurance of Theos". What you wrote actually supports my position of a indefinate sence of THEOS as in "A god",so I can't understand how you could make such a mistake,unless I as beleive you are not familiar with the arguments and dificulties of John 1:1c.
Since the bible teaches Jesus is God (Col 2:9, Heb 1:8) and the Holy Ghost is God.(Heb 9:14, Acts 13:2) To say "a god" is to say there is more than 1 God.
No, there are scriptures that call Jesus God and scriptures that call the Hoily Spirit God. So there is no room for guessing here. Either you accept what the scriptures say or you don't.
I have to take the bible as a whole. The immediate context deffinetly shows that Jesus has to be God Because John 1:2 says that the Word created everything. Why are you looking for reasons to not believe that Jesus is God?
John 1:1c"and the world was a god" is gramatically and especially contextualy the only choice. Biblicaly theScriptures teach Unitariansm it's not read in it's just the result.If you can prove that "a god" is wrong Scripturally thwn prove it and please stop assuming trinitarianism.John 8:54,17:3 and 1Cor 8:6.
Whatever Greg Stafford Clone. You need to prove that grammatically an "a god" translation is sound. From all the greek scholars I have read they all disagree with the NWT rendering.
Contextually it is not sound because it assumes 1 God is 1 Person. Since Jesus is God (Col 2:9, Heb 1:8) and the Holy Ghost is God.(Heb 9:14, Acts 13:2) To say "a god" is to say there is more than 1 God. Again are you scholled in the greek? Why are you running from this question?
You wrote "The greek will not allow an "a god" translation" by that statement I knew you were not a scholar nor did I imply you were,nor did I state I was one. You made a statement which is clearly wrong and I simply brought it to your attention. So is your statement "The greek will not allow an "a god" translation"" defensible using any greek rule(s). Remember John distinguishes the individuals with the term TON THEON and THEOS and NOT Father and Son which are personal terms.
I never said that you knew greek but you are making comments that would lead someone to blieve it. In fact you qualified it by saying:
"..."The greek will not allow an "a god" translation" by that statement I knew you were not a scholar..."
That comment suggest that you are familiar with the greek construction of the text. So if you are going to school me on the greek, I would like to know your qualifications. Where did you go to school?
You don't need to be a scholar to recognize that your statement "The greek will not allow an "a god" translation" is incorrect,but people would think that it was a gramatically based conclusion. You probably have many Scholarly Trinitarian Apologetical books and if you can show me where anyone would gramatically agrees with your statement ,then I would know how you could make such a statement.Also what rule(s) are you/they using.If you make video(s) you should be able to defend them,right?
This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ." Acts 2:36 "Therefore let all the house of Israel know for a certainty that God made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom YOU impaled.
Since I nfinally got your attention,don't ignore this the statement you said before.You wrote 3 weeks ago "The greek will not allow an "a god" translation." Well show us what rule(s) you are following,based on that fallacious conclusion
So are the VAST majority of bible scholars and translators "fallacious"? It cannot be translated "a god" because there is NO article after the 2nd occurance of Theos.
You're evading the comment by not specifying any rule(s).You made the claim so again "The greek will not allow an "a god" translation" How is that statement NOT wrong.Your zeal is making you look unscholarly.
I'm not a greek a scholar so I am NOT qualified to school you on the greek. I can only give you what the vast majority of scholars say. Are you qualified to school me on the greek? I am open to correction.
I know you are zealous in you defence of Jesus' divinity,which I am also,but you made a gramatically incorrect statement "The greek will not allow an "a god" translation" and I just want people to know that it is incorrect. John 1:1c "καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος" can be translaed as "and the word was a god" or "and the word was GOD,but John 1:1-3 says that the Word was with TON THEON so contextually "A god" is preffered if one leaves theology out of the translation.
Now You're evading my question. Are you qualified to school me on the greek? Where did you go to school? It's OK if you're not, we can still have a decent conversation. But don't be dishonest as to make it appear as if you are familiar with the original languages when you are not. Are you? Where did you learn greek?
John 17:3 "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent." So enternal life means knowing Jehovah God and His Son Jesus Christ. The way to know them is not listening to words and doctrines of men but read the Holy Bible. Men tickle your ears for money and self gain. Please read the Bible for the truth about God and His Son Jesus Christ. Amen!
John 20:17 "Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." Jehovah is the Father and God Jesus as well as mankind. Jesus ascended into heaven to sit at the right hand of God. Not to be Jehovah God.
John 14:28 "You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I." Jesus himself says the the Father Almighty God is greater than he himself. Read your Bible and it will be clear that Jesus is the Son of God, not Jehovah God.
1 Corinthians 25-28 "For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27For he "has put everything under his feet."[c] Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all." There is 1 God Jehovah & 1 Christ Jesus
One The Father is Trult GOD Jesus said so, John 17:3 "This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.' ICor8:6 "there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and we through him."
"John 17:3 "This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God..."
1. The words "Taking in knowledge" are not even in the text. The original greek says "that they may know you", indicating to have a relationship with Jehovah. This is simply another attempt at the organization trying to smuggle a doctrine into the NWT.
do you have all the parts to this episode?
manilamerc 1 week ago
@manilamerc Yes, I do.
October31st1517 1 week ago
@October31st1517 send it to me
manilamerc 6 days ago
@manilamerc I need to find it. Tell you what. I'll try to find it and upload the entire episode before the weekend is out. Please remember this was back in the 70's so the quality is not the best. God bless
October31st1517 5 days ago
Yes they were talking a lot of craps up there
raitasorin 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey Mark, perhaps you could entertain me for a bit by explaining why it says 'ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν' in John 1:1b instead of simply saying 'ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς θεὸ'?
TheGenuineChristian 2 months ago
Comment removed
TheGenuineChristian 2 months ago
@october31st1517 There is only one God according to Jesus at John 17:3 and that God is the Father. This is supported by Paul at 2 Cor 8:6 "to us there is one God, the Father". Paul also calls Jesus the "exact copy of his (Gods) very being" and the "Image of the invisible God" In that case, in the true sense of what the word God means, a powerful one, he must therefore be of divine nature. The video calls JWs "dishonest" in their version of John 1:1 many trinitarian scholars do not agree
steveparadise1 3 months ago
@ October31st1517 He mentions Dr. William Barclay who opposed the NWT and in particular their translation of John 1:1. That is true, he hammered it. 20 years later he said that "the Word was a god is a possible translation for John 1:1 Why did he not translate this verse as "the Word was God" in his NT?. He saw what many other trinitarian translators and scholars have seen. If you say "the Word was God" then what you are saying is the Word was ALL of God?
Excluding the Father and holy spirit
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 No, It shows that they have the same divine nature. If you have a "THE GOD" or an "a god". Then by nature there is more than 1 God.
October31st1517 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 This would only be true if λογος was preceded by the article. Then you would have an equation in the text and thus giving weight to an translation that would promote a oneses view not a Unitarian view. The passage simply states "και θεος ην ο λογοs", which literally translated is " and God was the Word". "the Word" is the subject of the sentence, which is the reason it's translated first in English followed by the imperfect form of "ειμι", "ην". emphasis over order.
chriscox1121 2 weeks ago
@October31st1517 By claiming that the JWs plucked "a god" out of the air to support their doctrine. JWs were not the first to translate John 1:1 this way. And they are not alone in seeing that John himself made a distinction between the two mentions of "theos" in this verse. It is not that important where else in scripture the definite article is used before God. The point is at John 1:1 he does, and for a reason. They give no consideration to a valid alternative at John 1:1
steveparadise1 4 months ago
And these guys are supposed to be smart. A bit biased.
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 How so?
October31st1517 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 maybe, but it would be a far cry to say JW are not bias as well. It's the most bias translation that's been produced. I would encourage you to read "crisis of conscience' by Raymond Franz. It's a free PDF download and he talks in depth about how the text was abused in the NWT. He was a JW almost his whole life
chriscox1121 2 weeks ago
yo hans greenbreg was a cathlic preast never kick out
jayandersons 4 months ago
Pearl Trees Of Life [a vast Biblical resource tool]:
[3w dot] pearltrees [dot com] [forwardslash] awhn
AWHNNOH 8 months ago
jone hasas greenbrug was a cathlic preast never disbared, why dose no one know this?
jayandersons 8 months ago
Is very easy and God and Jesue are one in the same that all
very easy JW wow you guys need to go open a KJV Not the nwt is not right!
nyguy9A 9 months ago
@nyguy9A I dont get why they make it so hard. they keep thinking we are saying that GOD the Father is Jesus..they simply do not understand what the trinity is.
rhdtv2002 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
****ALL HAIL THE RETURN OF THE ETERNAL LIVING GOD****
**THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, THE EVERLASTING FATHER**
********May 21, 2011, the ++Rapture*********
*************Judgment Day, May 21, 2011-Oct 21, 2011************
*****THE END OF THE WORLD BY FIRE, October 21, 2011******
++For the hand picked, born again Elect. Who were chosen, and had their sin debt paid, before the world began. ALL others face total annihilation.
Familyradio. com
dimstar4now 10 months ago
a god acts 28:6 kjb
jayandersons 11 months ago
@jayandersons And it is an error. What's your point?
October31st1517 11 months ago
@October31st1517 the a god at acts 28:6 proves this video wrong. a god john 1:1 enfactic dygot greek to englesh also proves this video wrong.
jayandersons 11 months ago
@jayandersons The OT proves also that the Jehovah who created everyone is Jesus in the NT..
rhdtv2002 8 months ago
@rhdtv2002 The creative prosses by god though jesus heb 1: 2 has at the end of these days spoken to us by means of a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the systems of things.
jayandersons 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jayandersons jesus does not know the day and the hour, jesus said the father is greater than I, jesus said why do you call me good?, John 5: 18,19 jesus said I cannot do anything by my own initiative, you want a thousand more quotes?
RAMIREZ3408 5 months ago
@jayandersons That Scripture is referring to what the barbarians thought of the Apostle Paul after a venomous snake had bitten him and he did not perish. A reply with all humility, with reference to the immediate context of Scripture from Acts 28:1 - 6.
Proverbs1533 4 months ago
@Proverbs1533 you missed my point the indefanet actacle (the letter A) they claim it dosent belong at john 1:1 or the thought of a god but there it is in there bible. or a man , a woman , a ect...
jayandersons 4 months ago
Comment removed
Proverbs1533 4 months ago
@Proverbs1533 you are right about john 1:6 . but john 1:1 is THE GOD and god from greek interliner god is large caps and spelled differnt then small caps thers a vid on it i'll send
jayandersons 4 months ago
@Proverbs1533 youtube.com/watch?v=qPQIJDcI_WY&feature=colike
jayandersons 4 months ago
Jesus has a mind, learning, forgetting and being limited like any other child of his age; loving God as Father and feeling filial obedience to the Father; praying, weeping and being tempted like anyone else; feeling agony in Gethsemane and perhaps even abandonment by God on the cross.
This is NOT someone who knew himself to be Almighty God, though he could have conceived himself as Messiah and Son of God. God acted in him, raising his mental capacities to new heights of inspiration.
TheEnlightened77 11 months ago
@TheEnlightened77 Can you show me from the scriptures that Monotheism is Unitarianism as you assume?
October31st1517 11 months ago
Hey, what is the intro song called??
selviskk 1 year ago
Assume that: This in John 1:1 The Word was 'a god" in Verse 3 It says, The Word created ALL THINGS and NOTHING came into existence apart from him. So the same 'a god' has to be indeed God in essence over all creation, and 'a god' can be seen as referring the that the Word was indeed a PERSON that person being identified as GOD.Thank you either way you have John is telling us God came in the flesh.
MrEmeraldfusion 1 year ago
@MrEmeraldfusion In other words your saying that not only is "a god" gramatically impossible, but also contextually impossible. Excellent point!
October31st1517 1 year ago
@MrEmeraldfusion. Excellent!
Tenorforte 9 months ago
The trinity teaches that God asked himself to go to earth to save mankind.
Then he agreed with himself and volunteered himself to himself to offer himself.
Then God impregnated a woman as himself, with himself.
God prayed to himself and glorified himself repeatedly.
God strengthened himself and talked to himself.
Finally God forsook himself and sacrificed himself to prove his loyalty to himself.
While dead he resurrected himself so he could exalt himself above himself.
Jthetinman 1 year ago
@Jthetinman Really, When did trinitarianism ever teach that God was 1 pERSON?
October31st1517 1 year ago
Dr. A.T. Robertson, the greatest Koine Greek scholar of modern times, says in "Word Pictures of the New Testament" regarding Jn. 1:1: "And the Word was God (καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying ὁ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. That would mean that all of God was expressed in ὁ λόγος and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (ὁ λόγος) and the predicate without it (θεὸς)...."
Calvinist007 1 year ago 3
Dr. A.T. Robertson, the greatest Koine Greek scholar of modern times, says, "So in John 1:1 theos en ho logos the meaning has to be the Logos was God...."--"Short Grammar", p. 279 Dr. Donald Guthrie, Greek scholar, states, "The absence of the article with Theos has misled some into thinking that the correct understanding of the statement would be that 'the Word was a god' (or divine), but this is GRAMMATICALLY INDEFENSIBLE [emph. mine] since Theos is a predicate."--"N.T. Theology", p. 327
Calvinist007 1 year ago 6
Exodus 6:3 And [ I appeared ] unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by [the name of] God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.
But yet the bible say's no man has seen the father at anytime, so who was it that was ALMIGHTY GOD that appeared to Abraham?
56Abraham, your father, was glad that he might see my day; and he saw, and did rejoice.' 57The Jews, therefore, said unto him, `Thou art not yet fifty years old, and Abraham hast thou seen?' it was jesus read vs 58
greatestgiftis 1 year ago
@greatestgiftis Genesis 18:1
Young's Literal Translation
And Jehovah appeareth unto him among the oaks of Mamre, and he is sitting at the opening of the tent, about the heat of the day;
jehovah God appeared to Abraham again. but yet the bible say's No man has seen the father at anytime, but yet Jehovah was seen by man, unless it was jesus the second person of the Trinity, the pre-incarnate christ
greatestgiftis 1 year ago
James Moffat, Scottish theologian and Greek scholar translated it pretty much the same way as the JW's do. I am not JW, BTW.
steve0281 1 year ago
Don't you love the use of the word "dangerous"? Like the bible is going to blow up, or bite you. Actually, it refers to any reasoning that does not agree with the speaker.
k0smon 1 year ago
thank you for posting this, Jehovah's witnesses are wrong. Jesus is the Truth and nothing else. God Bless!
77MiaFia 1 year ago
Good stuff here. Thanks for posting this vid. Peace and God bless.
mvgiles45 1 year ago
Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
Isa 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.
238Truth 1 year ago
Interesting video.
However, you cannot use the grammar alone to decide whether it is "God" or "a god." I've studied Koine Greek for four years now.
Besides that, the Sahidic Coptic translations have shown even more evidence for the translation "a god."
Side note: If you want to be taken seriously, don't act so childish and immature. A few comments down: "I win." Winning an argument or debate is never by words alone, it's by information behind those words.
iknowimalive 1 year ago
@iknowimalive So what is a more accurate translation?
October31st1517 1 year ago
@iknowimalive But the point that Dr. Robert is making is that the argument is inconsistent. Besides, Dr. James White says that when Theos doesn't have a definite article in front, it actually means that Theos becomes translated as "Divinity" referring to God's nature. So it becomes, "And the Word was Divinity."
But i have to agree. "I win" is an immature statement to end with for an argument.
changofFoolzz 1 year ago
this is to stut988uwxk,, You are AVOIDING THE POINT...You either believe in ONE GOD< or two gods, No matter how much you argue and fuss about it, you have put yourself in a spot,,, YOU EITHER BELIEVE THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD, OR IN YOUR OPINION THERE ARE TWO...YOU DON'T GET TO HAVE IT BOTH WAYS, ALL THE ARGUING IS POINTLESS.....ISAIAH 43:10-11
brandybeckydoc 1 year ago
@brandybeckydoc There are many Gods.
1 Corinthinans 8:5.6 "For even though there are those who are called “gods,” whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” there is actually to us one God the Father.."
The angels are also referred to as “godlike ones.” (Psalm 8:5; Hebrews 2:7). The apostle Paul described the Devil as “the god of this system of things.” (2 Corinthians 4:4). Moses is called 'God' (Exodus 7:1) God himself called others "gods" in Psalm 82:1, 6.
surfinsquirrel2008 1 year ago
@surfinsquirrel2008 But are they gods by nature? (Gal 4:8) Whatever it takes to be God BY NATURE, The Father, The Son, & The Holy Ghost have it, and no one else does..
October31st1517 1 year ago
@October31st1517 1 Corinthians 8:5,6 states very clearly that even though there are many called gods, "there is actually to us ONE GOD the FATHER.." who is above all other gods. No mention of the Son or holy spirit being co-equal with the Father, exactly the opposite. That's ONE Almighty God, the Father, not three.
Thousands of times throughout the Bible, God is spoken of as one person. When he speaks, it is as one undivided individual. The Bible could not be any clearer on this.
surfinsquirrel2008 1 year ago
@surfinsquirrel2008 But are they gods by nature?(Gal 4:8) Satan is the god of this world, but he is not a "god" by nature. Since attributes of almighty Godship are given to the Father, Son (Rom 9:5 Col 2:9) & to the HG,(Acts 13:2, Heb 9:14) I must accept what the bible says. Also 1 Cor 8:5-6 says that the one Lord is Jesus Christ. Does that mean that the Father is not Lord because the One Lord is JC? You're having problems Hermenuticly?
October31st1517 1 year ago
@October31st1517 1Cor. 8:6 itself answers that very statement you have made; just because someone like Christ is called “god” it does not mean that they are inherently God by nature.
Christ is NOT given the attributes of Almighty God. When we look at several of the primary attributes of Almighty God: omniscience, omnipotence, imutability/eternality and receiving worship, the Scriptures show that none of these attributes are intrinsic to Christ. Christ is not “by nature” God.
surfinsquirrel2008 1 year ago
@surfinsquirrel2008 Revelation would tend to disagree with you. Jesus calls himself the Alpha and the Omega. Who else in the scriptures calls themselves the Alpha and the Omega? Jesus also identified himself as the I AM, but again, you would never know that by reading the New World Mistranslation.
LizardSticker 1 year ago
@surfinsquirrel2008 Jesus is Jehovah Gods son he came down to earth and spilled his bloods for our sins(plus he also preached his father Jehovah God name and who he is), dont you think thats why JW go around preaching and knocking on ppls door...umm do you do that? i bet you dont....didnt you read that part you must of forgot 0_0 yeah um dude stfu you dont have your facts straight for shit.....or you cna continue so i can ripp you apart with the TRUE facts. <3
PYChamP 1 year ago
@PYChamP What does the term Son of God mean?
October31st1517 1 year ago
@PYChamP
I dont think God can have a son,jesus is a part of him,although hes called son.
shy52002 1 year ago
what a bout THE GOD and god ho thous?
jayandersons 1 year ago
Joh 1:18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.
Θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε· μονογενὴς θεὸς ὁ ὢν είς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο.
That is the greek rendering of that verse. It uses the word θεὸς (theos/God) to define the Son. The best greek manuscripts use this word to define the Son.
coreva 2 years ago
Sheila and others, I pray that you sincerely seek God's truth through his Word. Please consider that Jesus accepted worship. The NWT translates the Greek word for worship as "obesiance" when it refers to Jesus (Matthew 28, Hebrews 1 - just to name a couple of references). Yet the same Greek word they translate as "worship" when it refers to God. This is just one example of the many ways they manipulate scripture to fit their peculiar teachings.
larry60mondello 2 years ago
And what is the earliest Greek manuscript of John 1? If it is no earlier than 188 AD then you have nothing much to argue with: /watch?v=izUcK6yUEQg
Yuratchka 2 years ago
Dr. A.T. Robertson, the greatest Koine Greek scholar of modern times, says, "So in John 1:1 theos en ho logos the meaning has to be the Logos was God...."--"Short Grammar", p. 279 Dr. Donald Guthrie, Greek scholar, states, "The absence of the article with Theos has misled some into thinking that the correct understanding of the statement would be that 'the Word was a god' (or divine), but this is GRAMMATICALLY INDEFENSIBLE [emph. mine] since Theos is a predicate."--"N.T. Theology", p. 327
briancook007 2 years ago
But an prevebal nonarticular PN (THEOS) can be translated as indefinite/qualitive or as definite,so the context is the determing factor not a priory.How does the fact that "THEOS" is the predicate, mean that "a god " is indefensible?the Great Scholar Murray J. Harris:"According, from the point of view of grammar alone,[theos en ho logos]could be rendered "the Word was a god."-Jesus As God, 1992, pp.60. Again anyone saying that gramatically "a god" is wrong , is being dishonest and/or naive.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
Again, you are NOT a Greek scholar, you are NOT qualified to give a Greek grammatical opinion. W.E. Vine, who is both, tells us that "a god was the Word" is the literal rendering, but that to translate it that way is "entirely misleading", because other grammatical rules come into play, which I've cited. You Russellites know a litte Greek, but don't know much of it; Alexander Pope said, "A little learning is a dangerous thing." Give it up, man; you're embarrassing yourself.
briancook007 2 years ago
Why is "a god" then, not used in Matthew 3:9?
jazzbummer 2 years ago
1st of Murray Harris was a trinitarian. In the same publication he states:
In itself John 1:1a ... John implies the ETERNAL preexistence of the Word. He who existed `in the beginning' before creation was himself without a beginning and therefore UNCREATED. There was no time when he did not exist. John is hinting that all speculation about the origin of the Logos is pointless. (Jesus as God p. 54.
It is neither SCHOLARLY nor REASONABLE to translate John 1:1 "a god. Dr. JR Mantey.
I win.
October31st1517 2 years ago
Quote "no means an objective rendering " Really?I nwould say that the
the Word was God" is also bias and wrong,theology DOES play a role. Also "basic tenets of Greek grammar" and "exemplifies the rule that the subject is to be determined by its having the article when the predicate is anarthrous " what "RULE" and we know what the subject is at John 1:1c "Ho logos" what are you trying to say?A
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
I'm not saying anything; Greek scholar W.E. Vine says that to translate John 1:1 as "a god was the Word" is "entirely misleading". You may try to escape that in true Russellite fashion, but you are NOT a Greek scholar, you are NOT qualified to give a Greek grammatical opinion; he is. Again, the greatest Koine Greek scholar of modern times, Dr. A.T. Robertson, says that the correct translation is, "and the Word was God". So says Greek scholars Young, Darby, and Berry as well.
briancook007 2 years ago
As you said "I'm not saying anything"? ofcourse you're not saying it,but you quoting others to say what "you are saying". Again gramatically "the Word was a god" is correct. You have not showed me how it is incorrect,perhaps you could show me from A.T. Robertson,Darby and berry,how gramatically it is incorrect.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
Again, you Russellites know a little Greek, but don't know much of it. Greek scholar W.E. Vine says, "to translate it literally, 'a god was the Word,' is entirely misleading." You people try to apply a general rule of Greek grammar to a specific text (Jn. 1:1) while ignoring other Greek grammatical rules, and it doesn't work that way. You are NOT a Greek scholar, you are NOT qualified to give a Greek opinion. Robertson, Vine, Young, Darby, and Berry are, and they ALL say YOU'RE WRONG.
briancook007 2 years ago
You said "while ignoring other Greek grammatical rules".What rules?You do NOT any,if you do let's see tem.2nd Your quote "W.E. Vine says, "to translate it literally, 'a god was the Word,' is entirely misleading" but that is based on THEOLGY, in other words his determining factor is his theology. Anyone saying that "and the Word was a god" is gramatically incorrect in very wrong" Countess charts in this video are completely worthless,because they only apply in a interlinear.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
1st off, most greek scholars agree that grammatically and contextually you cannot translate Johnn 1:1 "a god". That is FACT. Even your society realizes this. This is why they wish to keep secret the names of the translators of the NWT. This whole preserving humility reason is nothing but an excuse. 2ndly, the reason you agree with an "a god" translation is because your theology mandates that assumption.
October31st1517 2 years ago
You can translate it "a god",and that is contextually the only possible biblically based fact,that is not assuming trinitarianiam. Either the Word was HO Theos(the Trinity) or he was a different THEOS. John distinguishes both not in personal terms Father and Son,but as HO THEOS and THEOS. The "Even your society realizes this" what they realise is written above,and 2nd it is based on theology that trinitarians ttranslate ""was GOD".
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
You have failed to show how it can be translated "a god". I agree that HO THEOS and THEOS prove that the Father and the Son are seperate PERSONS. However, here is where your ASUMPTION comes in. Because they in fact are 2 seperate persons they must be 2 different gods. WRONG! They both share the same divine nature and hence are the same God. In fact the context(John 1:3)shows that the Word is the creator of ALL THINGS. So contextually as well as grammatically an"a god" translation is erroneous.
October31st1517 2 years ago
Randolph O. Yeager says, "Only sophomores in Greek grammar are going to translate...'and the Word was a God.' The article with 'logos', shows that 'ho logos' is the subject of the verb 'en' and the fact that 'theos' is without the article designates it as the predicate nominative. The emphatic position of 'theos' demands that we translate '...and the Word was God.' Jn. is not saying as Jeh. Wit. are fond of teaching that Jesus was only one of many Gods. He is saying precisely the opposite."
briancook007 2 years ago
The emphatic position of 'theos' demands that we translate '...and the Word was God" again that is his opinion and it is deliberately a lie because word order in greek is irrelevant gramatically.You can quote all the bias Commentors and grammarians you want ,but the 3 facts remain clear "word order is unimportant" 2,gramatically it is correct and most importantly,3 it is contextually and monotheistically the only possible translation.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
Again, you are NOT a Greek scholar, you are NOT qualified to give a Greek grammatical opinion. Greek scholars Berry, Darby, Mantey, Vine, Young, and Dr. A.T. Robertson, the greatest Koine Greek grammarian of modern times, ALL say that the correct translation is, "and the Word was God." You can't dispute it, you're not a scholar. Give it up, Russellite; you're "toast".
briancook007 2 years ago
Famous quote "All will know that you are my disciples,if you have love among each other". also "Pray for those who persecute YOU for my sake". Your Quote "Give it up, Russellite; you're "toast"." Very cristian attitude,so you just want to argue and not discusse amicably.Very And again they translate "was God" based on there predispossed view of a Triune God.God Bless.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
Again, you are NOT a Greek scholar, you are NOT qualified to give a grammatical opinion. Robertson, Berry, Darby, Mantey, and Vine are, and they ALL say YOU'RE WRONG. Your desperation is showing horribly, Russellite; you can't win the debate, so you try to present yourself as the victim. You didn't give these Scriptures: "Ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." (Jude 3) "If ye believe not that I am, ye shall die in your sins." (Jn. 8:24)
briancook007 2 years ago
You just shot yourself in the foot. You just stated "it is...monotheistically the only possible translation."
You are ASSUMING 1 God equals 1 PERSON. And this is erronous.
Monotheism is the belief in the EXISTENCE of ONE GOD. Something that trinitarianism holds to.
However here really is the big difference. You reject the trinity, not because the bible doesn't teach it. But because the faithful & discreet slave TELLS YOU that the bible doesn't teach it. They are your final authrty.
October31st1517 2 years ago
All you have are sophomoric attacks ,you are just showing you true colors. I will not argue with unchristian persons. John 17:3 and 1 Cor. 8:6 all other apllication of "THEOS" to Jesus should be viewed with reference to them,Biblical Monotheisism,not preconceived view of the CHRIST.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
If you mean "sophomoric" as immature, I'm sorry you feel that way. But you know I am speaking truth here.
As in the words of the late greek scholar Dr Julius Mantey, "It is neither SCHOLARLY nor REASONABLE to translate John 1:1 "the Word was a god."
Are you going to believe someone trained in the biblical languages, or the so called faithful & discreet slave?
October31st1517 2 years ago
The only thing that's sophomoric about this debate is your lack of Greek knowledge; so says Greek scholar Randolph O. Yeager. You didn't bother to mention Mk. 2:5-7 and Jn. 10:30-33 when you cited Jn. 17:3, and you also didn't bother to mention Jn. 1:1-3 when you cited I Cor. 8:6. You are engaging in a logical fallacy with Jn. 17:3; Jesus didn't say that ONLY THE FATHER was the true God, He said that the Father was the ONLY TRUE GOD. He simply identified the Father as God.
briancook007 2 years ago
You should know that Jehovah comes from the verb form of "I AM", the same that Jesus said when He said "before Abraham was, I AM". Jehovah was never used in the Hebrew text (Torah) but in the Septuagint. To deny Jesus being God is telling Jesus Himself "You lie"
jazzbummer 2 years ago
To add to that is v5 where is specifically says that christ shared glory with the Father before the world was. Isaiah writes that he will not share his glory with another. This is something only God can do, hence Jesus being God. It matters when you read everything in it's context.
chriscox1121 2 years ago
@October31st1517 Can you explain the part that says the word was with god - how could something be with something else and yet be the same thing
sheika
00sheilagreasley100 2 years ago
they are the same in nature and essence not person
chriscox1121 2 years ago
@October31st1517 Mark.12:[32] And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:
According to the bible there is only one true God, any other god is not a true or not the true and living God.
The scripture clearly says there is ONE GOD and there is NONE OTHER BUT : " HE :" not HIM, but HE.
drey327 1 year ago
@drey327 So God is not personal? What's you're point? You need to prove that God is 1 person.
October31st1517 1 year ago
@October31st1517 The bible says clearly there is only one true God.
1tim.3:[16] And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
Who is God with a capital " G " that was manifest in the flesh ?
Jesus is God, and there is only one true God, without controversy, without arguing God was manifest in the flesh.
drey327 1 year ago
@October31st1517 what you are basically saying is that 3 persons make that one God and so when we are praying we should say God who is the Father who is Jehovah, and the Son who is Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost who is What? You see I am one of Jehovah's Witness who believe that Jesus Christ has to be honored as the Bible tells us as the Son of God, that is if you believe in the Bible and what it says not just one scripture and just ignore the rest - read John 3:16 and it will help
Sheila
00sheilagreasley100 1 year ago
@00sheilagreasley100 Here is your problem. You are ASSUMING unitarianism. Let's start off with this. Can you show me from the bible that God is 1 PERSON. Understand my question please. I did not ask if there was 1 God.Trinitarianism already accepts this. I asked if you could show me that this 1 God is 1 Person?
October31st1517 1 year ago
@00sheilagreasley100 In otherwords, you cannot show me from scripture that Monotheism is unitarianism?
October31st1517 10 months ago
W.E. Vine is qualified to give a Greek grammatical opinion, you are NOT. Again, what did he say? He said, "To translate it literally, 'a god was the Word," is entirely misleading. Moreover, that "the Word" is the subject of the sentence, exemplifies the RULE [emphasis mine] that the subject is to be determined by its having the article when the predicate is anarthrous (without the article)." Vine gives you a RULE in this quote; your ignorance of Greek is showing badly.
briancook007 2 years ago
@briancook007 Where do you get off calling people ignorant - you know to much greek that simple common sense does not exist in your book - Jesus was not educated but simple common sense is what he uses and yet the scholars of his day he put to shame - use your brains and you will see that Jesus and Jehovah are 2 different entities - The son worships the father - The son himself subjected himself to the father
Sheila
00sheilagreasley100 2 years ago
@00sheilagreasley100, I never called anyone "ignorant", ma'am. The New World Translation is a perversion of the Greek language. Greek scholars Berry, Darby, Mantey, Vine, Young, and Dr. A.T. Robertson, the greatest Koine Greek grammarian of modern times, ALL say that the correct translation of Jn. 1:1 is "and the Word was God". Whom did Isaiah see in Isa. chapter 6? He saw Jehovah (vs. 5). John says that Isaiah saw Jesus, proving Jesus IS Jehovah (Jn. 12:41).
briancook007 2 years ago
Hi Sheila - Please cite one Scripture where the Bible addresses Jesus in an act of worship toward His Father, and I will consider what you are saying here.
Thanks,
Jeremy
jrichard1977 2 years ago
Sorry jrichard1977 for taking so long to answer - My father was in the hospital with heart/kidney problems and then he had to travel to Barbados to run some tests - he is right now in Barbados -
If you can read Luke 4:8 and then read John 8;49,50 where Jesus said he is not seeking glory for himself - there are other scriptures which i will look up and then get back to you
Sheila
00sheilagreasley100 2 years ago
@00sheilagreasley100
All i know i was studying with jws for 2 years,but never felt at peace.Felt Jesus not given his status ans the holy spirit absent from thier worships.They are very nice people i love them ,but there is no salvation ,nothing without Jesus.Why so concerned about who is who?What did God say about Jesus? Noone can come to God without the son?
Hes not Michael the archangel or any angel etc.He is a part of God!
shy52002 1 year ago
I am discussion it with you,this is not a public forum? So are you saying that gramatically John 1:1c "a god" is wrong?
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
So are you saying that gramatically John 1:1c "a god" is wrong.
I am not. The vast majority of greek scholars are.
Dr. Paul L. Kaufman "The Jehovah's Witness people evidence an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets of Greek grammar in their mistranslation of John 1:1."
Dr. Anthony Hoekema,
New World Translation of the Bible is by no means an objective rendering of the sacred text into Modern English, but is a biased translation..."
Just a couple. Would you like more?
October31st1517 2 years ago
I have already answered what part don't you understand. You appreciate my comments,without understanding?Perhaps you can explain to me,without using the terms Father and Son,why it's correct from John1:1a to 1:1c without assuming trinitarianms to translate it "the Word was God"
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
You are ASSUMING unitarianism. If Jesus is with God than He cannot also be the God whom He is with. Is that correct?
October31st1517 2 years ago
Jesus says that only his father is the (John 17:3)true GOD and Apostle Paul confirms for him the ONE God is the Father(1 Corithians 8:6)Unitariaism is the result of Jesus and Pauls teachings, True Monotheism.Only by assuming trinitarianism can you try to circumvent these passages and the Scriptures as a whole. Is Jesus THEOS,of course!Biblically he is my qualified THEOS.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
Trinitarianism does not need to be ASSUMED as unitarinism does.
Jesus is God. (Heb 1:8, Col 2:9)
The HG is God. (Heb 9:14, Acts 13:2)
They are distinct from one another. (John 15:26)
So you see, this is where we trinitarians get our theology. From the bible.
Would you like to debate me on whether God is 1 Person or 3 on a public forum. In a gentlemanly manner that is.
October31st1517 2 years ago
(Heb 1:8, Col 2:9 I already have answered below and aslo you ignored John 17"3 and 1 Cor 8:6.You already beleve in the trinity so in you view you are not assuming it.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
I am currently making a video on John 17:3. have you ever heard of denying the antecedant?
October31st1517 2 years ago
Again it is all about how,that is, in what sence do you give to the "THEOS". I hope your video will be neutral and rely on grammer alone and not theolgy. As I said based on grammer alone John 1:1c can be translate 'was a god" or "was god/GOD.Don't make a poor video like this one,it makes you look uneducated. I'll be the first to comment I hope,though since I have not seen one serious videos by anyone, I don't expect much.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
Would you like to debate me on whether God is 1 Person or 3 on a public forum. In a gentlemanly manner that is.I notice you keep running from this because you are NOT QUALIFIED to say whether "John 1:1c can be translate 'was a god" or "was god/GOD." If anyone is uneducated it is you because of your final authority. The watchtower bible and tract society.
October31st1517 2 years ago
lets talk about john 1:1 but the first Q. I want to ask u is do u really believe that jesus is god.
thetruth697 2 years ago
It is clear that Jesus Christ is not God Almighty as the scripture at 1 Corinthians Chapter 15 verse 28 makes it clear that Jesus Christ will be made subject to Almighty God. Not only that, but at Colossians 1:15 says that Jesus is the image of the invisible God and the first born of all creation. So God created Jesus at the beginning of his ways.
stamosenterprises 2 years ago
1 Corinthians 15: 25For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27For he "has put everything under his feet."[c] Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all."
stamosenterprises 2 years ago
Dr. A.T. Robertson states in "Word Pictures" in his comments on Jn. 1:1 that the correct translation is "and the Word was God". Those who say otherwise are therefore "outgunned", as he was the greatest Koine Greek scholar of modern times.
briancook007 2 years ago
Another Giant Scholar Dr.Murray J Haris states "from the point of view of grammer alone θεον και θεος ην ο λογος could be rendered "the Word was a god". All Scholars recognize that John 1:1c can be translated that way,why they dogmatically prefer the contradictory "the Word was God" is due to Theology alone.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
W.E. Vine, noted Greek scholar, in his "Expository Dictionary", says, "to translate it literally, 'a god was the Word', is entirely misleading." So, you Russellites prove once again that you know a little Greek, but don't know much of it. "A little learning is a dangerous thing."--Alexander Pope
Again, Dr. A.T. Robertson, the greatest Koine Greek scholar of modern times, says in "Word Pictures" that the correct translation is, "and the Word was God".
briancook007 2 years ago
Again "the word was a god is gramatically correct. The translation "the Word was GOD isTheologically based and contextually wrong.Either Jesus is the "HO THEOS" The trinity or he is a THEOS, John uses the terms HO THEOS and THEOS and NOT Father and Son,this text is so easy if you don't assume trinitarianism and rely on biblically based Unitarian Monotheism,just as Jesus did John 17:3 and Paul 1 Cor.8:6.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
How is it "Contextually wrong"?
October31st1517 2 years ago
From a Trinitarian perspective it isn't contextually wrong, because you simply change the terms to Father and Son from Johns' terms HO THEOS and THEOS.Thanks for calling me a Stafford clone a few days ago,I take it as a praise,but you said it in a unchristian way,which coming from you is no surprise and it makes Jesus sad when people speak like you.Countess charts in the video are completly irrelevant to prove any inconsistency in the NWT. ONLY an interlinear has to follow those those charts.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
I appreciate your comments but you still havn't answered the question. How is translating the text "...And the Word was God" contextually wrong?
October31st1517 2 years ago
You are NOT a Greek scholar, you are NOT qualified to give a Greek grammatical opinion. Referring to Jn. 1:1, W.E. Vine, noted Greek scholar, says, "To translate it literally, 'a god was the Word,' is entirely misleading. Moreover, that "the Word" is the subject of the sentence, exemplifies the rule that the subject is to be determined by its having the article when the predicate is anarthrous (without the article)."--"Expository Dictionary", Vol. II, p. 160
briancook007 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
secret Mark's Gospel say Jesus was GAY
"And after 6 days JESUS TOLD HIM WHAT TO DO and in the evening THE YOUTH COMES TO HIM, WEARING A LINEN CLOTH OVER HIS NAKED BODY???" YOUTH MOLESTER!
Missing Fragments from St. Mark's Gospel shows Jesus performing homosexual behavior. A scholar from Columbia University named Morton Smith found manuscript fragments in a monastery near Jerusalem in 1958
MrHonestAbduI 2 years ago
Someone erased my comment so I will post it again and take a screen shot as proof. Ok you wrote "It cannot be translated "a god" because there is NO article after the 2nd occurance of Theos". What you wrote actually supports my position of a indefinate sence of THEOS as in "A god",so I can't understand how you could make such a mistake,unless I as beleive you are not familiar with the arguments and dificulties of John 1:1c.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
So you are refusing to answer if you are schooled in biblical greek. Fine we will leave it at that.
No, There is no THE or A. The reason you prefer 'a' is because you are assuming unitarianism.
October31st1517 2 years ago
[The reason you prefer 'a' is because you are assuming unitarianism]
Q: So Mark why do you prefer the translation 'God'?
bandaidmafia 2 years ago
Since the bible teaches Jesus is God (Col 2:9, Heb 1:8) and the Holy Ghost is God.(Heb 9:14, Acts 13:2) To say "a god" is to say there is more than 1 God.
October31st1517 2 years ago
Q: So you would translate as "God" instead of "a god" because you think the bible teaches that Jesus is YHWH?
bandaidmafia 2 years ago
No, there are scriptures that call Jesus God and scriptures that call the Hoily Spirit God. So there is no room for guessing here. Either you accept what the scriptures say or you don't.
October31st1517 2 years ago
Q: So in other words, you do recommend translating John 1:1 based on your understanding of other scriptures?
bandaidmafia 2 years ago
It's not my understanding of the scriptures.
The deity of Christ is not an interpretation of what the bible says, it is what the bible says.
October31st1517 2 years ago
Q: Mark if I understand you right you base your translation of a passage on what verses say elsewhere in the bible. Is that correct?
bandaidmafia 2 years ago
I have to take the bible as a whole. The immediate context deffinetly shows that Jesus has to be God Because John 1:2 says that the Word created everything. Why are you looking for reasons to not believe that Jesus is God?
October31st1517 2 years ago
Your reason for translating John 1:1 as "God" is based on your understanding of the testimony of the bible as a whole.
The JWs reason for translating John 1:1 as "a god" is based on their understanding of the testimony of the bible as a whole.
My only point is that the JWs are doing the same thing you are: trying to understand the prologue of John based on what the rest of the bible says.
PS I don't personally advocate translating it like the NWT but I do try to be fair with the text.
bandaidmafia 2 years ago
John 1:1c"and the world was a god" is gramatically and especially contextualy the only choice. Biblicaly theScriptures teach Unitariansm it's not read in it's just the result.If you can prove that "a god" is wrong Scripturally thwn prove it and please stop assuming trinitarianism.John 8:54,17:3 and 1Cor 8:6.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
Whatever Greg Stafford Clone. You need to prove that grammatically an "a god" translation is sound. From all the greek scholars I have read they all disagree with the NWT rendering.
Contextually it is not sound because it assumes 1 God is 1 Person. Since Jesus is God (Col 2:9, Heb 1:8) and the Holy Ghost is God.(Heb 9:14, Acts 13:2) To say "a god" is to say there is more than 1 God. Again are you scholled in the greek? Why are you running from this question?
October31st1517 2 years ago
For Col 2:9 compare Col 1:19 and Eph 3:19, and Heb 1:8 is qualified because it was originally applied to a israelite king.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
In other words, you are looking for reasons to believe Jesus is not God. How about debating me publicly on the issue "Is Jesus God"?
October31st1517 2 years ago
You wrote "The greek will not allow an "a god" translation" by that statement I knew you were not a scholar nor did I imply you were,nor did I state I was one. You made a statement which is clearly wrong and I simply brought it to your attention. So is your statement "The greek will not allow an "a god" translation"" defensible using any greek rule(s). Remember John distinguishes the individuals with the term TON THEON and THEOS and NOT Father and Son which are personal terms.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
I never said that you knew greek but you are making comments that would lead someone to blieve it. In fact you qualified it by saying:
"..."The greek will not allow an "a god" translation" by that statement I knew you were not a scholar..."
That comment suggest that you are familiar with the greek construction of the text. So if you are going to school me on the greek, I would like to know your qualifications. Where did you go to school?
Please answer so we can go forward and drop this.
October31st1517 2 years ago
You don't need to be a scholar to recognize that your statement "The greek will not allow an "a god" translation" is incorrect,but people would think that it was a gramatically based conclusion. You probably have many Scholarly Trinitarian Apologetical books and if you can show me where anyone would gramatically agrees with your statement ,then I would know how you could make such a statement.Also what rule(s) are you/they using.If you make video(s) you should be able to defend them,right?
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ." Acts 2:36 "Therefore let all the house of Israel know for a certainty that God made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom YOU impaled.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
What does it mean to KNOW the only true God?
October31st1517 2 years ago
Since I nfinally got your attention,don't ignore this the statement you said before.You wrote 3 weeks ago "The greek will not allow an "a god" translation." Well show us what rule(s) you are following,based on that fallacious conclusion
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
So are the VAST majority of bible scholars and translators "fallacious"? It cannot be translated "a god" because there is NO article after the 2nd occurance of Theos.
October31st1517 2 years ago
You're evading the comment by not specifying any rule(s).You made the claim so again "The greek will not allow an "a god" translation" How is that statement NOT wrong.Your zeal is making you look unscholarly.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
I'm not a greek a scholar so I am NOT qualified to school you on the greek. I can only give you what the vast majority of scholars say. Are you qualified to school me on the greek? I am open to correction.
October31st1517 2 years ago
I know you are zealous in you defence of Jesus' divinity,which I am also,but you made a gramatically incorrect statement "The greek will not allow an "a god" translation" and I just want people to know that it is incorrect. John 1:1c "καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος" can be translaed as "and the word was a god" or "and the word was GOD,but John 1:1-3 says that the Word was with TON THEON so contextually "A god" is preffered if one leaves theology out of the translation.
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
Now You're evading my question. Are you qualified to school me on the greek? Where did you go to school? It's OK if you're not, we can still have a decent conversation. But don't be dishonest as to make it appear as if you are familiar with the original languages when you are not. Are you? Where did you learn greek?
October31st1517 2 years ago
John 17:3 "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent." So enternal life means knowing Jehovah God and His Son Jesus Christ. The way to know them is not listening to words and doctrines of men but read the Holy Bible. Men tickle your ears for money and self gain. Please read the Bible for the truth about God and His Son Jesus Christ. Amen!
stamosenterprises 2 years ago
What does it mean to KNOW the only true God?
October31st1517 2 years ago
Jehovah is the Father and God of Jesus as well as mankind. Jesus ascended into heaven to sit at the right hand of God. Not to be Jehovah God.
stamosenterprises 2 years ago
John 20:17 "Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." Jehovah is the Father and God Jesus as well as mankind. Jesus ascended into heaven to sit at the right hand of God. Not to be Jehovah God.
stamosenterprises 2 years ago
John 14:28 "You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I." Jesus himself says the the Father Almighty God is greater than he himself. Read your Bible and it will be clear that Jesus is the Son of God, not Jehovah God.
stamosenterprises 2 years ago
1 Corinthians 25-28 "For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27For he "has put everything under his feet."[c] Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all." There is 1 God Jehovah & 1 Christ Jesus
stamosenterprises 2 years ago
So your telling me that subordination equals inferiority?
October31st1517 2 years ago
One The Father is Trult GOD Jesus said so, John 17:3 "This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.' ICor8:6 "there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and we through him."
stut9882iwxk 2 years ago
"John 17:3 "This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God..."
1. The words "Taking in knowledge" are not even in the text. The original greek says "that they may know you", indicating to have a relationship with Jehovah. This is simply another attempt at the organization trying to smuggle a doctrine into the NWT.
October31st1517 2 years ago
2. By stating that the Father is the only true God eliminates anyone else as the Only true God is to "DENY THE ANTECEDENT".
This would be an example:
"All men are mortal, Women are not men, therefore woman are not mortal."
It is a logical fallicy since we find scriptures that call Jesus God.(Rom 9:5, Col 2:9) & the Holy Spirit God.(Acts 13:2, Heb 9:14)
October31st1517 2 years ago
i dont understand explain how there not 3god s if one isnt the other????
bigiveee 2 years ago