ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Explain John 1:1

I ve had an interesting discussion with a Jehovah witness on John 1 v 1 on the word was with God and the word was God. Your views?

Join Our Free Dating and Take The Relationships Quiz
 ---pkay on 1/26/06
     Helpful Blog Vote (12)

Post a New Blog

Origen of Alexandria (2)

"There was God with the article [1:1b] and God without the article [1:1c], then there were gods in two orders, at the summit of the higher order of whom is God the Word, transcended Himself by the God of the universe. And again, there was the Logos with the article and the Logos without the article, corresponding to God absolutely and a god..."

Commentary on the Gospel According to John, translated by: Mensies, Allan, D.D., Professor of Biblical Criticism, St. Andrews University. Appearing as vol. q0 in: The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Translations of the Writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325, Origens Book 2, part 2, p 324. American Reprint of the Edinburgh 2nd Edition.
---scott on 2/28/11

Origen of Alexandria

Origen, who was a teacher in Greek grammar in the third century, wrote about the use of the definite article at John 1:1:

"We next notice John's use of the article in these sentences. He does not write without care in this respect, nor is he unfamiliar with the niceties of the Greek tongue. In some cases he uses the article, and in some he omits it. He adds the article to the Logos, but to the name of God he adds it sometimes only. He uses the article, when the name of God refers to the uncreated cause of all things, and omits it when the Logos is named God.... The true God, then, is The God (ho theos)."

Origen, Commentary on John, Book II, chap. 2
---scott on 2/28/11

If it is that MarkV believes I am hardened because I defend the Gospel writers Matthew and John in their application of Isaiah 40:3 (Matthew 3:3, John 1:23) then so be it. I'm glad MarkV feels I take a hard-line against those who misrepresent Bible writers. I hope that Mark will re-read Isaiah 40:3, compare Matthew 3:3 & John 1:23 and readjust his thinking.

To lose a sibling in death is tragic under any circumstance and I sympathise. There have been many who have died for what they believed to be truth or who died for their God. I have faith as do many others that those who die faithful to Almighty God Jehovah and his word will be given a resurrection to life- John 5:28,29, Acts 15:28,29.
---David8318 on 2/28/11

Yehovah Word[BRANCH-YESHUA] is the only correcting [rendering] of Yehovah Himself.Jer 23:5-6Behold, the days come,saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a[righteous Branch],and a King shall reign and prosper-shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.
In his days [Judah]shall be saved,and [Israel]shall dwell safely: and this is HIS NAME WHEREBY HE SHALL BE CALLED ["THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS"].
Yerusalem-"pointing the way to completeness".
"Yehudah" "throw your hands out with Praise" Yisrael-"he turns the head of God". Micah 1:1-3 For, behold, the LORD cometh forth [out of his place- will come down-tread upon the high places of the earth].
5:2[everlasting witness]
---char on 2/28/11

"You and David have done this before..." Mark_v

This blog was started by pkay on 1/26/06 and resurrected by Dr._David_F._Jones, mikeO and Eloy, not by David8318 or myself.

But we have the right to weigh in with our arguments and bible-based evidence like anyone else.

What is your view of John 1:1c knowing that a large number of (non-JW) bible scholars and translators have rendered it differently than the familiar "The Word was God" based on a literal translation of the Koine Greek?

How do you explain that the Sahidic Coptic, that does have an indefinite article, employs it in reference to "Theos" (Coptic noute) when referring to the Word or Christ in John 1:1c?
---scott on 2/28/11

"NWT"- Micha

I find it interesting (and quite telling) that after I exposed your false accusation(s) against me regarding Vines and Young's commentary that you side-step this completely and turn your attention to the NWT.

In this entire discussion have I not cited the NWT. None of the scholars I have cited are Jehovah's Witnesses. None of the the translations I have referred to have anything to do with their organization.

But rather than make a case against some 40 translations in addition to several Greek scholars (all non-JW) that have rendered this verse differently than your preferred "the Word was God" you attack a translation that I have not referred to.

Very telling.
---scott on 2/28/11



Keep teaching, someone will get the truth!
---ginger on 2/28/11

Micha, I agree whole heartily with you. I studied the New World Translation for over five years only because of my sister. Many of the words were changed but not all of them. In order to change the deity of Christ, they will have to do away with more passages and add some other meanings, because the New W. Translation still filled with many contradictions by the changes they have already made.
---Mark_V. on 2/28/11

aka, (reposted)

On another thread where I challenged your mishandling of the Hebrew plural for Elohim you said:

"you gotta know when to hold em' (don't give pearls to swine)." aka

Sure you don't want to hang on to your pearls of wisdom for someone more deserving?

Unless you can defend your claim regarding the plural noun from the other thread and answer the question that you have avoided regarding the 'fulness of deity' than I encourage you to save your pearls for someone that will not take a closer look at them to determine whether or not they are simply shiny little rocks.
---scott on 2/28/11

David, of course what I gave you, to you is wrong. I didn't expect any less from you. When the heart is hardened, nothing will take that person out of the Jehovah Witnesses or Mormonism they are in. My sister was a Jehovah Witness and died for their cause. Nothing would change her either. She refuse to take blood for her operation. I only gave those passages to both of you in the event God wanted to show you something. But God didn't. Maybe later in your life, God will want to reveal the Truth to you, just not now. I leave you peace.
---Mark_V. on 2/28/11

Char, Ive had a similar epiphany concerning the trinity. Whether or not it was of God or the workings my own imagination I dont yet know.

Father - soul or essence of God
Word - his spoken truth and power
Holy Spirit - how he sets his truth and power into motion

The "truth or power" of God was born into this world by the power of the Holy Spirit into the vessel of a fleshly body, prone to the same weaknesses that we have. PROOF that God is meek and lowly just as He said he was. Even willing to become a servant for mankind laying his life down for us.

Its the only conclusion I can come to that doesnt make any one part of God sound "less than" another.
Honestly its mind-boggling to me.
---CraigA on 2/27/11

Mat 6:24 No one can slave for two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will stick to the one and despise the other. YOU cannot slave for God and for Riches.-NWT
Notice that God is not 'a god' here even though there is no definite article, yet some want us to believe it can't be this way in John 1:1.
The rules of grammar for Greek have been defined, yet some will not listen, even though their own version denies their claims.
I guess it's time for another revision of the NWT to correct more of the supposed errors from our corrupt versions.
---micha9344 on 2/27/11

MarkV you are wrong to say that myself and scott attempt to make Christ a 'little god' as you put it. Rather, as has been clearly shown, the correct rendering of John 1:1 in accord with Greek grammar and context, '...the Word was a god'.

Zechariah 12:10 clearly shows Jehovah is making a prophetic reference to His 'son', His 'firstborn son' (NIV).

Jeremiah (not Zechariah) prophetically described His Son as 'Jehovah Is Our Righteousness' (Jer.23:6) in the same way He described Jerusalem as 'Jehovah Is Our Righteousness' at Jer.33:16. Do you believe Jerusalem is also Jehovah!?

Rather, both Jehovah's Son and His capital- Jerusalem will always be faithful in upholding Jehovah's Righteousness (1 Cor.1:30).
---David8318 on 2/27/11

MarkV- you are preaching what is contrary to Bible teaching for you say, 'Christ is spoken of as both Jehovah and Elohim' at Isaiah 40:3. To be frank, this is false and you teach contrary to how Matthew specifically applied Isaiah 40:3.

Matthew quotes Isaiah 40:3 at Matthew 3:3- 'This, in fact, is the one spoken of through Isaiah the prophet in these words: 'Listen! Someone is crying out in the wilderness, 'Prepare the way of Jehovah, you people! Make his roads straight''.

You believe Isaiah 40:3 is with reference to Jesus Christ? Not according to Matthew who applies Isaiah 40:3 to John the baptiser. Unless you believe John the baptiser is Jehovah, your application of this scripture & others is wholly suspect and at best weak.
---David8318 on 2/27/11

the use of theos in John 1:1 is well documented by scott and david and some biblical authors. so, can anyone please explain to me why that translation of theos is treated differently elsewhere? (paraphrase)
---aka on 2/25,26,27/11
---aka on 2/27/11

The Word of God comes from within Him-He spoke- performing what was spoken.
Aleph-Bereshiyt Bara Elohiym [Et]-In the beginning God formed[aleph-Tav]Gen1:1
Beyt-a House
In the Beginning "Bar-A"
The Word sent to mankind-When believed and confessed[action]We-[speak out His Word]---He confirms it[His action]

We House His Word within us.
Rom 10:9-10 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
1 Cor 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
Jn17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them, that they may be one,even as we are one:
---char on 2/26/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Menopause

"Decieving, misleading...false." Micha


I clearly identified these as "trinitarian scholars". They certainly have the desire and right to advance their particular views. However my interest is in the literal rendering of John 1:1 regardless of any theological posturing.

Look at Vine's comments closely.

"To translate it literally, a god was the Word, is entirely misleading." Notice that Vine does not deny that a god is a literal translation, but as we read further into his work, we cannot find any stated reason as to why this literal translation would be misleading.

However the point is: Vine identifies the literal translation of John 1:1c.
---scott on 2/27/11

"Decieving, misleading...false." Micha

Young's 'Concise Commentary of the Holy Bible':

"1. In The Beginning,] when (or before) God created man upon the earth, comp. Ge. 1. 1. was,] that is, 'existed,' not 'came,' merely.i , The Word,] which (according to v. 14), became Incarnate in the person of Jesus the Christ, as 'words' are the' usual medium by which men explain their plans to others, so it is applied to Jesus as the revealer of the Father...a reference to the great God...and the word Was god,] more lit. 'and a God (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word,' that is, he was existing and recognized as such."
---scott on 2/27/11

Scott, there is only One God. I know you and David have done this before and try to make Him a little god and not Almighty God, you should read Scripture to find out that Christ is not only referred to Jehovah, in Zech. 12:10 where Jehovah is speaking, the description is to be applied clearly to Christ. Revelation 1:7 describes Christ in the same language, and in Jeremiah 23:5-6, Christ is declared to be "Jehovah our righteousness" in 1 Cor. 1:30.
Christ is identified also with Elohim of the Old Testament In Isaiah 40:3, Christ is spoken of as both Jehovah and Elohim, Luke 3:4. In Isaiah 9:6-7 Christ is called , "The mighty God (Elohim)."
---Mark_V. on 2/27/11

Over and Over Yehovah defines Himself as One.
He spoke---Word
He Moves---In Spirit

Deut 6:4-5
Hear, O Israel: [The LORD our God is one] LORD:
5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
[Yehovah 'Eloheeynuw Yehovah 'echaad
The Lord our God Lord [is] one]

1 Timothy 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.

---char on 2/27/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Penpals

//At least 40 Bible translators/translations disagree with your view of the Greek //

How many agree with it?

1Co 1:22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
1Co 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness,
1Co 1:24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

some choose more wisely than others.
---aka on 2/27/11

Is 55:11So shall [my word] be that[goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void],but it shall accomplish that which [I please]-it shall prosper in the thing whereto[I sent it].

Jn 8:18[I am one] that[bear witness of myself],and the [Father that sent me beareth witness of me].Jn 5:36

//John 17:3 And this is life eternal,that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.//

1 John 5:10 He that believeth on the[Son of God hath the witness in himself]:he that believeth not God hath made him a liar,because he believeth not the record that[God gave of his Son].

Jn 10:30 I and my Father are ONE.
---char on 2/26/11

Scott, now your are decieving, misleading, and being false.
Lets start with Vines:
'To translate it literally, "a god was the Word," is entirely misleading'-pg 272
'It' refers to John 1:1, "and the Word was God" stated previously in the paragraph.
Moving to Young's Literal Translation:
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,
Scott, if you need to falsify claims to help your truth stand, is it really truth?
Shall I continue with any others that you may have misquoted?
---micha9344 on 2/26/11

//"And [a] God was the word."---How do you explain this?//
---According to Yehovah-He said-He is[the Beginning].
[Same statement] being [repeated] with--word pun and in chiastic stucture.

Jn 1:1[In the beginning] was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.[The same] was [in the beginning with God].
A.In the beginning was the Word,
B.and the Word was God.
B.and the Word was with God.
A.The same was in the beginning with God.

A.Who is the Beginning of all things--Yehovah
B.Who is Creator?---Yehovah
B.Who spoke?---Yehovah.
A.What is spoken and what is Written?
--Yehovahs' WORD---

The same was In the Beginning with God.
Yehovah SPOKE.Heb 11:3
---char on 2/26/11

Shop For Christian Books

At least 40 Bible translators/translations disagree with your view of the Greek at John1:1c:

1) "And the Word was a god"- Het Nieuwe Testament van onze Herr Jezus Christus, uit hit Grieksch vertaald dorr Reijnier Rooleeuw, M.D. (Dutch: = The New Testament of Our Lord Jesus Christ, translated from Greek by Reijnier Rooleeuw, M.D.), 1694.

2) "[A]nd the Word was a god"- The New Testament in an Improved Version, 1808.

3) "The Word was a God"- The New Testament In Greek and English, Abner Kneeland, 1822.

4) "[A]s a god the Command was"- A Literal Translation Of The New Testament, Herman Heinfetter, 1863.

---scott on 2/26/11

//I patiently await your superior chastisement of trinitarians posting quotes in support of their views// ---scott on 2/26/11

scott, stating your beliefs is fine. trying to minimize another's witness through extreme sarcasm greatly weakens your witness whether true or not. this applies to everyone.

anyway, the use of theos in John 1:1 is well documented by you and david. so, can either of you please explain to me why that translation of theos is treated differently elsewhere.
---aka on 2/26/11

YHWH means "he exists." YHWH is the one who exists every where every time.

His Word comes from within Him---He spoke out.

To my understanding this is the path we follow.
From beginning point it is from within Yehovah.
At the ending point we end up with Him.

The path we walk[action] is following His Word.

And Yes-

///and (the) Word was (that) God.
and (the) Christ was (that) Rock.
All definitive.
---micha9344 on 2/26/11///

To this I agree.

With a definitive---Amen.
---char on 2/26/11

John 1:1 Greek (3)

"Purely on the basis of the Greek text, therefore, it is possible to translate 'a god' rather than 'God.'"

Newman, Barclay Moon, Eugene Albert, Joint Authors. A Translators Handbook on the Gospel of John. Series: Helps for Translators. p. 344.

Based on the Greek alone even some trinitarian scholars admit this passage may be literally translated as "the Word was a god".

This includes W. E. Vine (An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words), Dr. C. H. Dodd (director of the New English Bible project), Murray J. Harris (Jesus as God), Dr. Robert Young (Young's Analytical Concordance, Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible, etc.).
---scott on 2/26/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Accounting

///I patiently await your superior chastisement of trinitarians posting quotes in support of their views
---scott on 2/26/11//

As stated---read-study-wait on God to confirm.
You and I are both just man in comparison to (1)God who defines Himself by (2)His Word-(3)Confirmed by Him alone in Spirit and in truth.

Neither one of us can change that.
---char on 2/26/11

No, despite the continued misinformation promoted by micha9344, I do not believe there are 2 God's in heaven.

As I've said before, I am in agreement with the Apostle Paul who stated, '...there are many 'gods' and many 'lords', there is actually to us one God the Father.'

There is only 'one God the Father' whose name is Jehovah- Ps.83:18 (older editions KJV). There are others who are given the description of being 'a god', godlike or 'divine'. (2 Cor.4:4) But there is only one 'Almighty God'. Micha's claims of 'Arianism' are baseless.

Micha's attempt to suggest that I believe in 2 'God's' only serves to highlight micha's lack of understanding as to what 'god' ('theos') actually means and its use in the scriptures.
---David8318 on 2/26/11

//Sahidic Coptic was a living language during the Koine Greek era -AND significantly this language does (unlike Koine Greek) have an indefinite article.//


Yehovah is not subject to Human language.He gave HIS WORD-Each letter He gave-defines Him[beauty missed through western thinking]. He is complete and did not miss one dot.Man misses-idoms-word puns-chiastic stucture etc...
The more we are expose to God - the more humble we become-To HIM.Don't seek my understanding-or any other man-Ask Yehovah Himself. I appreciate many points you have posted,[My understanding to them-and concern]-[It appears] you don't end up at Yehovah-but with Michael.
Following Yehovah way[Yeshua]-is the path that leads right back to Him-no other.
---char on 2/26/11

"There is only one who knows God---God Himself." Char

"Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." John 17:3 NIV
---scott on 2/26/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Fundraisers

John 1:1b ...kai Theos en ho Logos.-Lit: and God was the Word.
1Cor 10:4b Petra en ho Christos.-Lit: and Rock was the Christ.
Acts 28:6b ...theon auton einai.-Lit:god he was
John 8:44b ...eikinos anthropoktonos en ap arches.
Lit: he murderer was from beginning.
John 8:44d ...pseustos estin.-Lit: liar he was.
(Caps mine)
The definite article preceeds the subject of a predicative clause.
To apply proper grammar rules to John 1:1c only 1 verse here can be compared, 1Cor 10:4c.
There must be context. Notice in both John 1:1, and 1Cor 10:4 a flow of idea passes through, God and Rock respectively.
So to render this correct:
and (the) Word was (that) God.
and (the) Christ was (that) Rock.
All definitive.
---micha9344 on 2/26/11

thanks for the info.

There is only one who knows God---God Himself.

Ezekiel 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine, as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

Praise God for His mercy and Grace.
Repentance unto Remission
---char on 2/26/11

"What you both are stating is what you have been taught and a list of names of men and the dates of men who agree with what you believe. Again--[they are just men]. Char

You do realize how this comment smacks of hypocrisy right?

My quotes were posted in response to Micha's post about Sozomen. Apparently you have no issue with someone (Micha) quoting the words of men as long as they happen to agree with your theology or "what you believe." Most curious.

I patiently await your superior chastisement of trinitarians posting quotes in support of their views
---scott on 2/26/11

"Study the language and culture." Char

Fair enough. The topic of this thread is John 1:1-

The 3rd clause of this verse (john 1:1c) is missing the definite article for 'theos' (in reference to the Word) when in reference to the Almighty (1:1b 'theon') we find the article?

How do you explain this?

Sahidic Coptic was a living language during the Koine Greek era - AND significantly this language does (unlike Koine Greek) have an indefinite article.

How does the Coptic render John 1:1c? With the indefinite article.

It translates into English:

"And [a] God was the word."

How do you explain this?
---scott on 2/26/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce

Scott and David,

Study the language and culture. God defines by His Word. What you both are stating is what you have been taught and a list of names of men and the dates of men who agree with what you believe. Again--[they are just men].

Encourage-learn Yehovahs' Word and the message He has given---Not men or tradition.

Don't take my Word or any other mans Word.
Yehovah Word defines and declares Himself-
Down to each letter- declared in the Heavens---

This does not change no matter how many names of men- given.

1 Corinthians 2:16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ
---char on 2/26/11

//This would have been an ideal place for Paul to have taught the trinity if it were true.//

I agree. However, Paul was addressing those who talked of lords and gods, so there was no sense in digressing.

He does show his belief in the existence of the three in one unity in 2Co 13:14

Paul wrote 2/3 of the NT. He addressed different heresies in every letter, but he did not mention the trinity. This would have been an ideal place for Paul to have taught the trinity if it were false. actually, the trinity is false in one respect and correct in another.

anyway, why won't you address my question about Paul's and others use of theos? how can it be 'God' and 'a god' in the same verse in so many places?
---aka on 2/26/11

Arius (c.250-336AD)
'The Evangelists, too, when they declared that the one Father was the only true God did not omit what concerned our Lord, but wrote: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.'-Ignatius (c.35-117AD)
'He also bestowed salvation on the men included in the creation, thus commenced His teaching in the Gospel: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.'-Irenaeus (c.-202AD)
How could such a one be a mere man, receiving the beginning of His existence from Mary, and not rather God the Word, and the only-begotten Son? For in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,and the Word was God.-Ignatius
---micha9344 on 2/26/11

I'm not suggesting aka is a trinitarian. I merely pointed out the fact that the Apostle Paul at 1 Cor.8:5,6 does not teach the false trinity doctrine. Paul did not say '...One God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.' This would have been an ideal place for Paul to have taught the trinity if it were true. But the trinity is not true, it is a false teaching.

Contrary to aka's continued misinformation, no where have I said that 'theos' should always be translated 'a god'. However, 'theos' is not the same as 'ho theos' ('divine' is not the same thing as 'God'). According to Greek grammar and context, 'theos' on its own without the definite article 'the' ('ho') as in John 1:1 is correctly translated 'a god'.
---David8318 on 2/26/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Jewelry


Sozomen recorded these comments well over 100 years after the events took place. He was not there.

In addition, his objectivity is clearly suspect as he is referred to as an "apologist for Constantine" in The Ecclesiastical History of Sozomen.

The same publication states:

"Sozomen is an inferior Socrates [who he plagiarized] ...The chronological scrupulosity of [Socrates] has made no impression on his follower, he has either wholly omitted or inaccurately repeated the characterizations of persons, borrowed from Socrates."

"Evidence of a boundless credulity with regard to all sorts of monkish fables is to be met with everywhere."

Emphasis mine.
---scott on 2/26/11

What Plato called the 'Demiurge', Philo referred to as 'the Logos.'

S. E. Frost, Jr., Ph.D, writes:

'Philo taught that there were many powers, or spirits, which radiated from God... One of these powers, which he called the 'Logos,' was the creator of the world. This Logos, worked with matter and out of it created everything in the universe... God, through the Logos, created the universe.'

Certain individuals transferred to 'the Word' of the Gospel of John characteristics of the 'Demiurge' and 'Logos' mentioned in the non-Biblical writings of Plato and Philo. Since that pagan 'Demiurge' or 'Logos' evidently had always existed alongside the supreme God, it became 'orthodox' to teach that Jesus was coeternal with God.
---David8318 on 2/26/11

Sozomen (2)

The New Catholic Encyclopedia states:

"There are many faults and shortcomings in his work...but it was not in his power to correct them. Frequently it was hard for him to know the truth because of the mass of divergent evidence with which he had to deal, frequently there was not enough evidence..."

"The work of Sozomen suffers in many ways by comparison with that of Socrates...In doctrinal matters he aimed constantly at being in thorough accord with the Catholic party..."

Hardly an objective or reliable recounting of events that happened over 100 years prior to the writing of his book(s).
---scott on 2/26/11

scott, quite an impressive list.

this is the list for those who believed in bloodletting. Bloodletting is one of the oldest medical practices including the Mesopotamians, Egyptians, Greeks, Mayans, and the Aztecs that just ended in the mid 19th, let's list just a few advocates of bloodletting: Hippocrates, Erasistratus, Herophilus Archagathus, Galen of Rome, Talmud writers, Islamic medical authors, Ioannis Sculteti, Armamentium Chirugiae, Sir William Osler, Benjamin Rush (a signatory of the Declaration of Independence), George Washington, Joseph Pancoast...just to name a few.

professing themselves wise, they became fools.
---aka on 2/25/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Furniture

///there is actually to us one God the Father.'---David8318 on 2/25/11 ///

And God spoke.
His Word became flesh and dwelt amoung us.

Emmanuel-God with us.
Matthew 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth [a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us].
---char on 2/26/11

No matter how much David belittles those whose do not agree with his version of John 1:1, He still believes there are 2 perfect Gods in Heaven, a god, Jesus, and the God, YHWH.
"He(Arius) fell into absurd discourses, so that he had the audacity to preach in the church what no one before him had ever suggested, namely, that the Son of God was made out of that which had no prior existence, that there was a period of time in which he existed not"-Sozomen
-No one before him ever suggested? Don't JW's claim this was prior knowledge and not something concocted by man? That it was the posthellenic neoplatonic trinity heresy that later came about?
---micha9344 on 2/25/11

//...Paul did not say there is one God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Paul did not believe God was a pagan Hellenic trinity.// --David8318 on 2/25/11

I never said anything about trinitarianism as I am not a trinitarian.

//Rather, Paul taught there is 'One God the Father'. //

Paul also taught we acknowledge one Lord, Jesus Christ. Because there will be many who talk about many gods and many lords.

Also, the word 'theos' is used throughout the 4 gospels and almost 350 times by Paul, which you David said means 'a god'. So, wherever theos is used are we supposed to translate it 'a god'? e.g one a god the father.
---aka on 2/25/11

John 1:1

The New Testament in an Improved Version by Archbishop Newcome (1808): "The Word was a god."

NT by Abner Kneeland (1823) "The Word was a God."

The Monotessaron (The Gospel History) by John Samuel Thompson (1828) "The Logos was a god."

American Translation by Smith and Goodspeed (1946) "The Word was divine."

Coptic Version of the New Testament by George Horner (1911) "And [a] God was the word."

New Testament of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Anointed by James L. Tomanek (1958) "The Word was a God."
---scott on 2/25/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Laptops

The question posed by micha9344, 'How many perfect G(g)ods are there in Heaven right now?'- reveals micha's lack of understanding of what the word 'theos' means in the context of a scripture such as at John 1:1 and 1 Cor.8:5,6. I have answered it, it's just that micha9344 lacks the spiritual insight to discern the answer.

As The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, edition of 1955, Volume 1, page 370, states- 'Monotheism transcends the spiritual grasp of the Babylonian mind.'

I will answer micha9344 question (again) with 1 Cor.8:5,6- '...there are many 'gods' and many 'lords', there is actually to us one God the Father.'
---David8318 on 2/25/11

No Cluny, Jehovah's Witnesses do not mistranslate John 1:1, and are not the only Christian organisation to translate this verse to read 'and the Word was a god'. This conforms to Greek grammar and the context of the verse.

It's up to the translator to determine when it's appropriate in any given verse to use a capitalised 'g' to distinguish between The Almighty God and 'a god'.

Evidently the false trinitarian translators of your Bible choose erroneously to translate Jo.1:1 to read the Word was 'God'. (Is this another blessing for you?)

' letters as we know and use them today didn't exist in ancient Greek.'- Cluny(2/25/11). So why does Cluny use a capital 'G' at Jo.1:1 when context and grammar do not demand it?
---David8318 on 2/25/11

Yes, Jehovah's Witnesses do believe all of 1 Cor.8:5,6. But not according to aka's erroneous rendition of it.

Aka believes this scripture says, 'If all things through one, then how can all things be through another?'

Does the verse say or teach this? If aka cares to re-read this scripture, he will realise it does not.

Rather it is 'out of' or 'from' God the Father. THROUGH 'Jesus Christ'. Jehovah God created everything, through His son, Jesus Christ.

Interesting Paul did not say there is one God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Paul did not believe God was a pagan Hellenic trinity. Rather, Paul taught there is 'One God the Father'.
---David8318 on 2/25/11

Do Jehovah Witnesses believe all of 1Co 8:6?

"yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist."

If all things through one, then how can all things be through another? it also says we exist for one and exist through the other.

from Romans to Philemon, Paul uses the word 'theos' for God nearly 350 times. so, are we to understand that 'a god' should be used instead of God?

In all fairness, shouldn't 'one God, the Father' in the above verse be 'one a god, the Father'?
---aka on 2/25/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Lawyer

JfalseWs mistranslted it as "the Word was a little g god."

Never mind that capital letters as we know and use them today didn't exist in ancient Greek and Hebrew mss.
---Cluny on 2/25/11

John, I agree with your answer concerning the "Word" the "Logos" and I agree with Micha's statements. John borrowed the use of the term "word" not only from the vocabulary of the Old.T. but also from Gr. philosophy, in which the term was essentially impersonal. Where God's Word brought the world into being. Strategically, the term "Word" serves as a bridge word to reach not only Jews but also the unsaved Greeks. John chose this concept because both Jews and Greeks were familiar with it. The Word, as the Second Person of the Trinity, was in intimate fellowship with God the Father throughout all eternity. Yet, willingly took the form of man to die on the Cross.
---Mark_V. on 2/25/11

Yes Miche--agreed/NOTED.
Understanding Word puns-chiastic structure-idoms and culture helps see the beautiful Truth.Without the Holy Spirit-the idea that The Word of God is not God-is[lamed-twisted].The Word BECAME flesh-(Jn1:14)-named Immanuel-[INTERPETED for us IN WRITING] GOD WITH US.
Jn 10:36-38[Son of God]
Jn 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world...
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the INVISIBLE GOD...

Different dimension--ONE-GOD.

2 Kings 6:17 And Elisha prayed,and said,LORD, I pray thee,open his eyes,that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man, and he saw: and, behold,the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.
---char on 2/25/11

I appreciate information given by Jehovah witnesses-however-many-questioned asked-scripture-letter witness etc-go ignored.For this-I acknowledge in agreemnet a heed and concern.

Bereshiyt-Gen 1:1 [In beginning] God created the heaven and the earth.
In the beginning was the Word,and the Word was with God,and the Word was God.
Bet-Son [written and spoken word]
Jn 1:3 All things were made by him,and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Gen 1:3[And God said],Let there be light: ...
God is-Aleph to Tav-written-Declared-confirmed-down to each letter.Rev 1:8-[I AM] Alpha and Omega,the beginning and the ending,saith the Lord, which is,and which was,and which is to come,the Almighty.
---char on 2/25/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Dedicated Hosting

Notice here how David eludes the question....
How many perfect G(g)ods are there in Heaven right now?
---micha9344 on 2/24/11

The truth which sadly eludes trinitarians such as Eloy and micha9344 is the fact that John 1:1 does not identify 'the Word' as 'the God' it is 'with'.

Rather, the sentence structure at John 1:1- 'theos en ho logos'- describes the 'word' as 'a god'. The same rule of Greek grammar appears at Acts 28:6 where after surviving a snake bite, people thought Paul to be 'a god', not 'God' as a literal word for word translation would read.

Greek grammar and context demand that both Jesus and Paul are described as 'a god' at John 1:1 and Acts 28:6 respectively.

Jesus Christ is not part of a triune-trinity. Jesus is the Christ- 'the SON of God'- John 1:34. The Christ (Messiah) cannot also be The Almighty God (El Shaddai).
---David8318 on 2/24/11

You would need to know Koine Greek to understand the significance of what John is saying here.

The Word in Greek is Logos.

The meaning of Logos was established by early Greeks philosophers leading back to Heraclitus(500BC).

Logos means: The shaping, directing, and ordering of the Universe. It is a spiritual entity only! This force made to indwell in a single human ("The Logos was made flesh") was an Earth Shattering concept.

For until John, Logos was a participant of the divine order and by that very fact distinct from the material and historical world of man.

---John on 2/24/11

So, how many perfect G(g)ods are in Heaven right now?
---micha9344 on 2/24/11

Read These Insightful Articles About Online Marketing

Eloy is wrong in his assertion that Jehovah's Witnesses believe in more than one God. This is completely untrue.

Paul said, '...there are many 'gods' and many 'lords', there is actually to us one God the Father.' 1 Cor.8:5,6.

Jehovah's Witnesses are in agreement with the Apostle Paul. Jesus is 'a god' (Jo.1:1). But Jehovah's Witnesses believe in only one Almighty God- Jehovah, and they conduct a public witness for Jehovah God in their worldwide preaching activity. (Mt.24:14)

Eloy is at odds with the Apostle Paul's statement at 1 Cor.8:5,6. Does Eloy believe Paul is teaching there is more than one 'God', or 'gods'? Jehovah's Witnesses believe as did Paul that there are 'many gods' but only 'one God the Father'.
---David8318 on 2/24/11

Trinitarians differ in belief, one from another. But the bare facts are- the triune-trinity mystery is cultured from false triadic Babylonian gods.

Satan started false triadic worship in places such as Babylon. Plato's philosophy of 'metaphysics' (nature and substance)
gave Hellenists the philosophical thesis to manipulate Babylons triad to appear as a triune-trinity or 'one God in three' deity.

From pagan Roman Emperor Constantine's time onward the triune-trinity was gradually grafted into his false RCC, creating Christendom, with all its cults and sects worshiping the triune-trinity mystery.
---David8318 on 2/23/11

John1:1,and John 1:14 disproves the trinity. In the beginning was the word, thats God's word,not jesus, And the word became flesh, God's word became flesh, not Jesus became flesh It was God's word that created everything. Gen 1,3,6,9,11,14,24,26, And God said. When God spoke the world into creation His ward did not become what He spoke , God's word only became Jesus (Flesh) In other words Jesus is the living word of God . the word of God is not Jesus.
---mikeO on 2/22/11

Jehovah witnesses are a nonChristian cult, and they believe in more than one God.
---Eloy on 2/19/11

Read These Insightful Articles About VoIP Service

Is this discussion still active?
---Dr._David_F._Jones on 2/18/11

Part 2 The word was with God.--His co-existence with the Father. The word was with God, and the word was God. --So God's plan between Him and the Son to bring reconciliation of man to God was decided in the beginning.--- It is not man searching for God. It is God searching for man. What a God. [The word had a being[God] before the world had a beginning. He that was in the beginning never began, and therefore was EVER. This concludes explaining John 1-1. Thank you.
---catherine on 4/1/07

Christ the word---Because He is the only begotten Son, [one of a kind], who is in the bosom of the Father. The Father has declared Him. In the beginning was the word. This prooves of Jesus's existence even before His incarnation,but before all time.---He that was in the beginning never began, and therefore was EVER. -----There was a glory and happiness which Christ had with God [and still does] before the world was.
---catherine on 4/1/07

In Genesis "God said let US make man in OUR image after OUR likeness" Sounds plural like John1 to me :)
---TS on 4/1/07

Read These Insightful Articles About Settlements

JW NWT reads "a god." Grammatical construction: "singular anarthrous predicate noun preceding the verb & subject noun (implied or stated)," not just that the noun theos lacks the Greek definite article. Examine verses within your Bible, most translators insert "a" or "an": John 4:19; 6:70; John 8:44a & b; 9:17; 10:1, 13, 33; 12:6. At those verses, identity of the one discussed was not at issue; no, but the class and/or quality was, same is true for John 1:1c. Agape.
---Alan on 4/1/07

Our pastor who is Spanish was sharing with us that the word...WORD in Spanish is translated Verbo...A verb as you know is a doing our God, Jesus is Verbo the One that DID the Father's will.
---Mishon on 4/1/07

I am stumbling on the rocks of ignorance here, but I have always believed that John 1:1 is making a reference to the Trinity(three-person division if you will) of the godhead. When the term with is used that implies that another entity exists.
---mima on 3/31/07

Mike: I definitely agree that Scripture teaches the Triune nature of God. However, when you said, "_Pros ton theon_ reads 'he was the God', definite article not indefinite," I must ask you to be more careful with Scripture! The Greek "pros" means 'with' or 'towards' so you obviously quoted the wrong phrase from John1:1. For my comments on John 1:1, see:
and the exchange I had with 1st_cliff from about 11/12/05 through 11/18/05.
---Daniel on 1/28/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Services

pkay; JWs are not the only ones to dispute the trinity doctrine! Mike; I have an interlinear by G W Berry. Jn.1.1 Goes thus..In the beginning was the Logos , and the Logos was "with" (ho theos) the God,and theos ( without "the" ho) was ( Greek has no article "a") God! + there has to be more than one to be "with" anything! + how does 1+1 =3?
---1st_cliff on 1/26/06

When Christ sent out the 70, he sent them out in pairs. That may be so one person could be praying in the spirit, while the other witnesses. Luke 10:1
---Ulrika on 1/26/06

You will have problems with J.W.s on this because their version of the bible says 'and the word was a god' whereas ours says 'and the word was God'. They will argue with you until they are blue in the face that Jesus is not God and that He is the Son of God - a totally separate and lesser god. I no longer argue this point with them and simply tell them what He did for ME and where my assurance of salvation comes from. They do not have that assurance.
---M.P. on 1/26/06

Copyright© 2017 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.