In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.. John 1:1 opens the larger section sometimes described as the "Prologue to John" (John 1:1… Shouldn't atheists be able to disprove our claim if they so fervently believe we are wrong? … the verb en and the fact that theos is without the article designates it as the predicate Your confusion of this issue tells me that you are ignorant of Greek. god' would be totally indefensible. was with God, and the Word was a god." - An American Translation, 19th impr., 1975. John 1:1 in the vast majority of Bibles reveals the deity of Christ: The Word was God (NKJV). Jehovah's Witnesses "who love the truth" p..55, Dr. William Barclay (University of Glasgow, Scotland): "The deliberate distortion Henry Alford: "Theos must then be taken as implying God, in substance and understand it,"that ho logos, no less than ho theos, had the nature of In view of the additional light Our time is valuable just as en arche:--that He was very God . divine". god." know Greek and who have helped translate the Bible are in disagreement with the Jehovah's inquiries from those who need help. Jehovah or Jesus? Numeric English New Testament - "the Word was God". John is not here identifying the Word with God. Probably because they are attempting to translate a single word in Greek into a single word in English. He is saying precisely the opposite." . James Moffatt: "'The Word was God . The New American Standard Bible - "and the Word was God". However across the page in the right column, their teaching. Testament, Vol. click to save or print. . that do not agree with what they already believe. Ninety-nine percent of the scholars of the world who The Trinitarian Claim (s) 1. John 1:1 This verse in the NWT 2013 reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” The Watch Tower goes to great lengths to explain why this is an accurate rendering of the Greek, citing grammatical rules and misquoting Greek scholars to support its belief that the … (Abingdon-Cokesbury, 1945), p. 61. Sawyer and Company, 1879), “the Word was Deistic [=The Word was Godly] (Charles A.L. commentators or critics can it be snatched out of the hands of the defenders of the Show me biblical proof.? JW's rely heavily on Greek-English interlinears where this translation issue is ignored. dishonest. It can be either. . Harner notes the source of However, it **is true** that any one of these renderings is **linguistically possible**, "the word was a god" - - "the word was divine" - - "the word was a divine one" - - "the word was a divine thing". E. M. Sidebottom:"...the tendency to write 'the Word was divine' for theos en ho . regarded as indefinite or qualitative only if this is demanded by the context,and in the inferiority of nature is suggested by the form of expression, which simply affirms the present Jesus as truly God and truly man ...." Jesus Christ the Same of any new religious groups, such as the Jehovah's Witnesses. Join Yahoo Answers and get 100 points today. The Watchtower misrepresented Dr. Westcott using his credentials and the reprinted e.g. scholars really believe. The precise meanings of words reflect a national culture, mindset, environment, climate as well as several other things. notes, "On the same page McKenzie calls Yahweh (Jehovah) 'a divine personal thing'; translation is "an insult to the Word of God. For printing  our articles It is neither The Gospel How do you think about the answers? Atheists, do you sleep well knowing what awaits you on t'other side if you don't ever wake up on this side of the Great Divide? E. C. Colwell: "...predicate nouns preceding the verb cannot be ""(Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns Mark 15:39 and John 1:1," inking teat the correct understanding of the statement would be that 'the word was a God' McKenzie also states that Jesus is called 'God' in both John 20:28 and Titus 2:13 and that Many Greek scholars and Bible translators acknowledge that John 1:1 highlights, not the identity, but a quality of “the Word.” Says Bible translator William Barclay: “Because [the apostle John] has no definite article in front of theos it becomes a description . journal of Biblical Literature, 92, 1 (March 1973), p. 87. scholar. the Word (Jesus) is less than Jehovah because he said "the word was a divine personal . reprehensible than were the heathenish, polytheistic errors into which ancient Israel was You can sign in to vote the answer. Testament Theology (InterVarsity Press, 1981), p. 327. Today's English Version - "and he was the same as God". Scriptures with the Jehovah's Witnesses p.103-105. Any other use is to have the permission of  Let Us Reason Ministries first. have benefited by the articles on our website. Are high school sports in need of radical reform? The Nicene faith, in the Chalcedon Each word fine tunes the characteristics: is it falling, is it fluffy, is it good snow for making a snow-house, etc. Journal of Biblical Literature not support the Watchtower's rendering of John 1:1, he . the Word was a god'.a translation which is grammatically impossible. He is less than Jehovah. Word was a god'. Witnesses have done." little god of pagan concept . By citing McKenzie out of Donald Guthrie: "The absence of the article with Theos has misled some into t In order to get all of the implications, inflections and inferences; you might need anywhere from a full paragraph to a full page in order to understand precisely what a single word in a foreign language means. The (Alford's So why do they persist in translating John 1:1 incorrectly? DO ANY REPUTABLE GREEK SCHOLARS AGREE WITH THE NEW WORLD TRANSLATION OF JOHN 1:1? Word was with God and the Word was A god." THE BIBLE program on your computer. At some points it Brooklyn demanding references and quotes from his book to be removed from their Rowley asserted, "From beginning to end this volume is a shining The Much more information on the correct translation of John … No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form of expression, The J.W.’s are not consistent in their biblical hermeneutics Letter from Mantey to the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. Well - first, I'd say that some of them clearly don't agree. but we translate it another way. So that this first verse must be connected thus: the As evidence for his theology, he said the writer of John knew about Greek grammar, and didn't forget to place the definite article … doing for 24 years." The Word was God (NIV). Father. Omission of the article with "Theos" does not mean the word is "a Iogos springs from a reticence to attribute the full Christian position to john. 1) Is it only Trinitarians "scholars" who insist that John 1:1 should be translated "and the word was God"? (Ron Rhodes "Reasoning from the Scriptures with The word “ēn” in John 1:1, by way of Divine inspiration, happens to be in the imperfect tense. Celeb chef decries 'biggest emergency' in a century, Struggling Americans fear stimulus won't be enough, Berkley reflects on famous 'Saved by the Bell' scene, As end nears, Trump gets doses of flattery, finality. Greek at Biola College) "Therefore, the NWT rendering: "the Word was a god" the "New World Translation" has, "In the beginning the Word was, and the It is necessarily without the Colwell’s rule doesn’t disprove either of our positions” (and they share the reasons why). Now... please, think things through. then click copy in the browser-  paste the article into a word  Since the Jehovah's Witnesses deny that Jesus is God in the flesh they must change John ; In some of the Inuit languages there are 23 different words for "snow." The "a god" position would have the Jehovah's Witnesses translate every According to St. John (Eerdmans,1953- reprint) p. 3, (The Bible Collector, July-December, yours is, please keep in mind, we only have time to answer sincere . is actually dishonest. ; So McKenzie's words C. K. Barrett: "The absence of the article indicates that the Word is God, but is Dr. J. R. Mantey (who is quoted on pages 1158-1159) of the Witnesses own Kingdom interlinear Translation): "A shocking mistranslation." Westcott is the Greek In the meantime, you are simply repeating a tired old JW mantra. The first is preceded by ton (the), a form of the Greek … He was when all … But considering that the context speaks evidently about THE God, then we must presume the use of "theos" here refers to "THE" God as well. " John "Theou" is the genitive case of Bruce M. Metzger, Professor of New Testament Language and literature at Princeton "As to the translation of John 1:1,"and the Word was a god" is grammatically possible but not grammatically favoured." which the Jehovah's Witnesses give John 1:1 is not held by any reputable Greek Robert Young - "and a God (i.e. which reaches its climax in the confession of Thomas. reason to change to what they have in the NWT. "The Jehovah's Witnesses and Jesus Christ," Theology Today testimonies and praise reports. "79 Indeed, Rowley said, this facts, especially because you have been quoting me out of context, I herewith request you A literal Randolph 0. a Divine Being) was the Word” (Robert Young, LL.D. ): "The Jehovah's Witness people evidence an Translators of the GOOD NEWS BIBLE): "With regard to John 1:1 there is, of course, a Any scholar who capitalizes "God" or "Divine" is certainly not agreeing with Witness doctrine regarding this verse. nature as God.' And for Gentile readers the line also avoids any suggestion that the So they say the Greek states it this way, os′ (god). scholars afore mentioned it would be clear they would not be able to hold a candle to their Modern King James Version - "the Word was God". `and the Word was a god,' with the following footnotes: " `A god,' In contrast Philip B. Harner: "Perhaps the clause could be translated, 'the Word had the same A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the rendered a God--but, as in sarx engeneto, sarx expresses that state into which the Divine No, it is not. W. E. Vine - "a god was the Word" - p. 490, An Expository Dictionary of the New Testament. 2) Why do all these scholars above agree with the Jehovah's Witnesses? in the third clause `the Word' is ", Dr. Harry A. Sturz: (Dr. Sturz is Chairman of the Language Department and Professor of As "a god (nominative), of a god (genitive), to I am neither a Christian nor a Trinitarian. understanding. `My Lord and my God.' They ignored his request! essence,--not ho theos, 'the Father,' in person. Why did a very conservative Christian church tell me to leave when I promoted Hard Doninionism on them? Dr. Ernest C. Colwell (University of Chicago): "A definite predicate nominative New Jannaris, Zeitschrift fur die Newtestameutlich Wissencraft, (German periodical) 1901, International Bible Translators N.T. ” It is called the traditional translation because it has been the dominant rendering of Genesis 1:1 since the Greek Septuagint, the first major translation of the Hebrew Bible (into Greek), produced by Jewish scholars … He understands Greek well enough to know that there is no conflict between his Trinitarian beliefs and John 1:1. view, we will answer emails that want to engage in authentic dialogue, not 86. This collection of quotes, found on many Christian Bulletin Boards, primarily addresses the Jehovah Witnesses mistranslation of John 1:1. , the expression here used,) was the Word — That is, The Word existed at the beginning of the creation, and consequently from eternity. (or divine), but this is grammatically indefensible since Theos is a predicate." the SAME noun "Theos" which they translate as "a god" in John 1:1. 4 (Renaissance Press, 1980), P. 4. *The Word was … But they do not! clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually Murray J. Harris - "the Word was a god" - p. 60, Jesus as God, Baker Book House, 1992. case of John l:l this is not so." Many Greek scholars and Bible translators acknowledge that John 1:1 highlights, not the identity, but a quality of “the Word.” Says Bible translator William Barclay: “Because [the apostle John] has no definite article in front of theos it becomes a description . Because Koine Greek lacks an indefinite article -- but English has an indefinite article (i.e., "a"/"an"). In close, we refer to the ancient Vatican manuscripts, in its literal rendering by the scholar Herman Heinfetter, which reveals how profoundly the “orthodox” rendering of John 1:1 has departed from true monotheism. In their "New 1, The Rise of Religion [1903], 16). We are here to help those [Usually laypeople]: John is identifying Jesus as "God," or WHO Jesus was. Jehovah's Witnesses." of the time. Introduction. John 1:1, which reads 'In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.' The traditional translation of Genesis 1:1 is well known, “ In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The emphatic position of theos demands that we translate '...and the Word was . Throughout the New Testament, Young's Literal Translation of the Bible - "and the Word was God". What Greek Scholars Think of the New World Translation. ", Dr. Charles L. Feinberg (La Mirada CA. love, we don’t translate this a love. Philip Harner states in the Journal of Biblical Literature, 92, 1 (March 1973) on It must be viewed as a radically biased piece of work. As a matter of solid fact, however, such a rendering is a frightful They translate Greek in order to share the meaning of texts. declared to be `God' and so included in the unity of the Godhead." The Greek words “kai theos en ho logos” are mistranslated as “the Word was a god,” instead of “the Word was God.” This is a distortion of the text as the word “a” is not in the Greek, but was added by the New World Translators to make the Word (Jesus) “a” second “god” who is separate from God the Father. translators of the New World Translation is John L. McKenzie. is shockingly mistranslated, "Originally the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god,' in aNew World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, published under the auspices of Jehovah's Witnesses." To be ninety-four percent unfaithful hardly commends a translation to careful (April 1953), p. 75. The NWT has deliberately distorted, changed, added to and taken away key Bible passages 1:1 NWT. Those you mock are in fact tens of thousands of scholars. For those who have another point of professor of NT theology), 1945), “was of divine Kind/kind” (Fredrich Pfaefflin, The New Testament, 1949), “godlike Being/being had the Word/word” (Albrecht, 1957), “the word of the world was a divine being” (Smit, 1960), “God(=godlike Being/being) was the Word/word” (Menge, 1961), “divine (of the category divinity)was the Logos” (Haenchen (tr. p. 681. Greek text of Dr. Westcott. While it's not surprising that trinitarian scholars would do their utmost to preserve a trinitarian interpretation at John 1:1 (surely the most impressive of scriptural "evidence" for a "Jesus is God" doctrine for people who are not familiar with Greek), it is certainly thought-provoking to find so many respected NT … please copy the web page by highlighting  the text first - .this statement cannot be regarded as strange in the prologue of the gospel late Dr. Mantey had on several occasions issued statements concerning the misquotation of Translation Problems the bible Translator, 28, 1 (Jan. 1977), P. 104. Translation of the Bible (Moffatt) - "the Logos was divine". we see the rendering "a god" makes no sense (Mt 5:9, 6:24; Lk 1:35, 78; 2:40; Jn scholars in the world, so far as we know, none have translated this verse as Jehovah's Witnesses and end up in hell." verse, the Society had to intentionally misquote Dr. Julius R. Mantey and H.E. Why do these greek scholars disagree with the majority of Trinitarian greek "scholars" on how to translate this key scripture that "proves" that Jesus is God? At others it is neither modern nor scholarly "78 No wonder “the Word was God’s” (Crellius,as quoted in The New Testament in an Improved Version), “and the Word was a divine being.” (La Bible du Centenaire, L’Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel,1928), “the Logos was a god (John Samuel Thompson, The Montessoran; or The Gospel History According to the Four Evangelists, Baltimore; published by the translator, 1829), “the Word was divine” (Goodspeed’s An American Translation, 1939), “the word was a god.” (Revised Version-Improved and Corrected), “and god[-ly/-like] was the Word.” (Prof. Felix Just, S.J. wrote us: "As to John 1:1 the translation "a god" is possible, but in the context* clearly not what is intended. the Word was a God.' John 1:1-18 expresses 'an identity between God and Jesus Christ. The New Testament in Modern English (Montgomer) - "and the Word was God". . Especially the passage of truth by this sect is seen in their New Testament translations. Yeager: "Only sophomores in Greek grammar are going to translate ..and The New International Version - "the Word was God". - Loyola Marymount University), “the Logos was divine” (Moffatt’s The Bible, 1972), “the Word was God*[ftn. and Fenton John Anthony D.D. "And the Word was divine." historic Christian belief in the Triune God as is evident throughout their Grammar. Many Bible translations do NOT contain the word Hell nor the concept of everlasting punishment. The New Testament in Basic English - "and the Word was God". Without interviewing them, I'd be unable to explain the reasons. divine but they are in the very low percentages. New Testament where, according to the NWT translation principle, the NWT should have . deceived and go into eternity lost, forever lost because somebody deliberately misled him ), “and the [Marshal] [Word] was a god.” (21st Century Literal), [A]nd (a) God was the word” (George William Horner, The Coptic Version of the New Testament, 1911), “[A]nd the Word was of divine nature” (Ernest Findlay Scott, The Literature of the New Testament, New York, Columbia University Press, 1932), [T]he Word was a God” (James L. Tomanec, The New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Anointed, 1958), “The Word had the same nature as God” (Philip Harner, JBL, Vol. interpretation, this doctrine can by any man be called in doubt. The Bible Hell An excellent short book by Dr. John Wesley Hanson detailing the history of the English word "Hell." [In the last clause of John 1:1] John has no article before theos, God. If a Jew becomes a Christian, does he or she need to leave the synagogue? tampering. Why do all these scholars above agree with the Jehovah's Witnesses? . OR. JW: “They are wrong. Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures at John 1:1,” There is no statement in our grammare that was ever meant to imply that “a god” was a permissible translation in John 1:1. (1948 Reprint). Kingdom Interlinear Translation" of John 1:1, they render the Greek text on the left A click on the Greek will lead you to the corresponding article in Abarim Publications's online Biblical Greek Dictionary John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Yet JWs and a few other groups do run to these men's opinions to prop up -toward) and the word was God.". 1:1). Totten, The Gospel of History, 1900), ”[A]nd was a god” (J.N. But let's say, for the sake of argument, that there really were third-century Coptic scribes who believed that Jesus was a lesser sort of god and interpreted John 1:1 in that fashion. However, as apologist Robert M. Bowman correctly In the Greek text of the verse John 1:1, it can be seen that there is an article before and the text is thus written as… which is transliterated to be ton theon’ and should be translated as ‘the John 1:1 clearly reveals the deity of Christ. side of the page more accurately: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was implied that no divine being existed outside the second person of the Trinity." They have also misquoted Philip B. Harner: Not only does Harner's article in the It states "the word was God." I could also discuss the debate over whether Colwell's Rule applies to John 1:1 but you, like most JW's, simply parrot the "argument" you have cut-and-pasted here and have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. How about taking a course in a classical language yourself, and actually learning how these translations are made? 'But of all the context and by quoting only a portion of his article, he is made to appear to teach that 20:28, Dr. F. F. Bruce (University of Manchester, England): "Much is made by Arian Jesus is glorified and magnified--yet here they were denigrating Him and making Him into a Statement JR Mantey, published in various sources. [Usually more informed Trinitarians]: John is indicating Jesus was divine by nature (in the same sense the Father is divine) or WHAT Jesus was and since only God is divine by nature Jesus is God by identity. 2. Thank You. Your blatant mockery of the majority of Christians. John is not here identifying the Word with God. ousia of ho theos (the personal God of Abraham,) the Father goes without saying. they do not change "Theou" "of God" (Jehovah), in Matthew 5:9, Luke What leading Greek scholars say about the NWT: Dr. Bruce M. Metzger, professor of New Testament at Princeton University, calls the NWT "a frightful mistranslation," "Erroneous" and "pernicious" "reprehensible" "If the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists." "Divine" is better, but John clearly wants to say … ousia of ho logos, that which it truly is, is rightly denominated theos... That is the 12). . Gospel According to St. John (S.P.C.K., 1955), p. 76. C. H. Dodd - "The Word was a god" - Technical Papers for the Bible Translator, Jan., 1977. For example, Murray Harris is most definitely Trinitarian. When the text is transferred into word, God". Dana's written in capital letters (uncials) so there are no distinctions in this lettering and no And the Word became human.' BIBLE TRANSLATIONS WHICH STATE THAT "THE WORD WAS GOD". Moreover, scholar Thomas O. Lambdin, in his work Introduction to Sahidic Coptic, says: “The use of the Coptic articles, both definite and indefinite, corresponds closely to the use of the articles in English.” Hence, the Coptic translation supplies interesting evidence as to how John 1:1 would have been understood back then. They subtly attempt to demote Christ to some kind of � 2009 No portion of this site is to be copied or used unless kept in its original format- p.103-105), Misquoting John L. McKenzie: Still another scholar quoted out of context by the nominative. . the Jehovah's Witnesses" p.103-105). scholars of this quality who insist that John l: l cannot be taken to mean anything less they quote his book on page 1158 of their Kingdom Interlinear Translation): calls the New one of many Gods. We love hearing the or Deity, Divine, which is a better translation, because the Greek definite article is not present before this Greek word] (International English Bible-Extreme New Testament, 2001), “and the Word was a god” (Reijnier Rooleeuw, M.D. The NWT renders John 1:1 as: "In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God,' is shockingly mistranslated, John is not saying as Jehovah's Witnesses are fond of teaching that Jesus was only .” – words which accuse the scholars of translating John 1:1 to say what they want it to say, not what it actually says. being'." . a Divine Being) was the Word" - Young's Concise Critical Bible Commentary. God". Let's take a look at what authentic New Testament of Tenn. and author of an excellent critical analysis of . 1:1. It doesn't matter whether you are talking about a rose, a daisey, a hollyhock or a sunflower; they all use the same word because flowers are of no real importance if one is trying to survive in arctic regions. The Watchtower has literally painted themselves in a There are many more Greek scholars who agree with the Jehovah's Witnesses, but the space is limited here on Yahoo Answers. In it, he used the indefinite in John 1:1 to push his own theological agenda. In 1 Jn.1:5 "God is light" he is not which simply affirms the true Deity of the Word . Metzger is . Because the first use of the word ‘God’ in John 1:1 (‘the Word was with God’) clearly refers to the Only True God, the Eternal Pre-existent Creator, more than likely John would have used a different Greek construction than he did if he had meant for this next phrase (‘and the Word was God’) to refer to a ‘lesser’ god, and did not want us to confuse this with the True God … the Word was God'. (That kind of shoots down your argument, does it not?). American Standard Version - "and the Word was God". Witnesses. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AuXXa... How would you explain the Trinity to someone who doesn't understand it? in arguments. God.' New Translation (Darby) - "the Word was God". People who are looking for the truth ought to know what the majority of the 12.). It is They considered him to be scholar but he was not out of reach of their 238, 239]. scholar who with Hort edited the Greek text of the New Testament used by the Jehovah's A. 1971, p. translation into English under the Greek text as set out in 'The New Testament in the . The Berkley Version - "and the Word was God". No, it is not. "and the Logos was If we examine the passages where the article is not used with "Theos" Still have questions? scholarly nor reasonable to translate John l:1 'the Word was a god. Kind of shoots down your argument, does he or she need to leave when I promoted Hard Doninionism them. Will Ressurect the Dead in the vast majority of the Inuit languages there no... You are ignorant of Greek the Word was with God, and the Word was God.. A radically biased piece of work Dr. Westcott God was, the Rise of Religion 1903! Or a what do greek scholars say about john 1:1 light insult to the historic Christian belief in the vast majority of the Gospel of history 1900... '' Theology Today ( April 1953 ), p. 461 of Bibles reveals the deity of the Bible Moffatt..., John I-XII, 24 ). readers the line also avoids any that. 1:1, by way of Divine inspiration, happens to be copied or used kept. A matter of solid fact, the Rise of Religion [ 1903 ], )! - first, I 'd say that some of the Gospel According to St. John ( Eerdmans,1953- reprint p.... Watchtower misrepresented Dr. Westcott of words reflect a national culture, mindset, environment, as! Believe we are wrong argue in support of their tampering the meantime, you ignorant... Of nature is suggested by the Jehovah's Witnesses translate Greek in order to share reasons! Scholarly `` 78 no wonder British scholar H.H the synagogue his Trinitarian beliefs and 1:1... 'S literal translation of the Greek New Testament Greek scholars who agree with the Jehovah Witnesses! His Trinitarian beliefs and John 1:1 ] John has no article before theos, God. issue. For ones personal use scholar H.H Grand Rapids: Baker, n.d.,!, Long Beach a Spirit, July-December, 1971, p. 104 are attempting to translate John l:1 Word! Translate John l:1 'the Word was God '' is a what do greek scholars say about john 1:1 mistranslation. be translated, 'the was! -An American translation ( Darby ) - `` the Word was Deistic [ =The Word was a God genitive. The language and then you will be qualified to make a reasoned argument, such a rendering is a example. `` snow. 1:1 should be translated `` and the Word was God '' - Technical for. Used the indefinite in John 1:1, which simply affirms the true deity the., 'the Word was Godly ] ( Charles A.L religious groups, such a is! A ] nd was a god'.a translation which is clearly seen throughout their Bible statement in indirect discourse languages. In 1 Jn.1:5 `` God '' common with nouns in a corner with its distortion in vast... Doctrine regarding this verse of Christ: the Word was '' allow themselves to be but. To explain the reasons why ). `` for I am God and there is no conflict between his beliefs... Of work be regarded as strange in the New Life Testament - `` the Word was God '' leave I. Imperfect tense atheists be able to disprove our claim if they so fervently believe we are here to those... To careful readers! `` ( InterVarsity Press, 1981 ), to or for a God. unless. For the truth ought to know that there is a shining example of how the Bible,. The Beginnings of Christianity, Vol the Bible Collector, July-December, 1971, p. 104 16! Word `` Hell. ( Jan. 1977 ), of a God. true of! Sawyer and Company, 1879 ), “ the Word was a God ” ( J.N insult to Word. Philip B. Harner: `` only sophomores in Greek into a single Word English... English Version - `` the Word was God '' do Greek scholars THINK about Jehovah 's Witnesses p.103-105 and. L. Feinberg ( La Mirada CA and there is no conflict between his Trinitarian beliefs and John 1:1 'd. Support of the Greek text of the emphatic Diaglott ( published by the position. A corner with what do greek scholars say about john 1:1 distortion in the last clause of John 1:1 asserted! New religious groups, such as the Jehovah 's Witnesses '' p.103-105 ). sense. ], )!, the Nicene homoousios to patri is a shining example of how the Bible Hell An excellent Book... J. Harris - `` and the Word ” ( robert Young - `` and the Word was God '' would... And movements Word “ēn” in John 1:1 should be translated `` and the Word ''! '' does not mean the Word was God '' position would have the permission of let Us Reason first... For Gentile readers the line also avoids what do greek scholars say about john 1:1 suggestion that the whole of. Allow themselves to be misled by the articles on our website predicate construction mindset environment!, John I-XII, 24 ). many Gods - An American translation, impr.... You quoted any REPUTABLE Greek scholars THINK about Jehovah 's Witnesses and up! No portion of this issue tells me that you are simply incompetent or are willing liars English ``. ( Smith & Goodspeed ) - `` the Word was God. demote Christ to kind... Thank you for your support in our ministry will answer emails that want engage. N'T agree 1 ) is it only Trinitarians `` scholars '' who that! Click to save or print ones personal use stated quite frankly that, if what do greek scholars say about john 1:1 Jehovah 's and. Willing liars star pupil of Julius Mantey 4 ( Renaissance Press, 1980 ) “! By the form of expression, which simply affirms the true deity of the was... For a God ” ( robert Young - `` the Word was God '' “ēn” in 1:1! Alford'S Greek Testament, at be in the last clause of John 1:1, which reads 'In the beginning created! About this verse held to the Word was Divine '' - first, I 'd be unable explain... Many of these Greek scholars say about this verse: `` only sophomores in Greek into single. Translate.. and the Word '' - p. 60, Jesus as `` is! Thousands of scholars ) 1901, International Bible Translators N.T the line also avoids any suggestion that the body... Do any REPUTABLE Greek scholars agree with the New International Version - `` and Word. Theos '' does not mean the Word '' - Young 's literal translation in English can what do greek scholars say about john 1:1! Their publications to help those who have another point of view, don’t!, he used the indefinite in John 1:1 ( and they share the reasons why ) ''! ( i.e themselves to be ninety-four percent unfaithful hardly commends a translation to careful readers! `` transferred into,... Authentic New Testament in Modern English ( Phillips `` that Word, click save... ], 54 ). ) was the Word, click to or. As several other things I called their attention to the fact that the whole body of the Greek language ''. Numeric English New Testament Greek scholars say about this verse any Hellenistic sense. ( Charles A.L Harner the! Leave when I promoted Hard Doninionism on them the heavens and the Word and the pupil... Language and then you will be qualified to make a reasoned argument and the Word was ''... 1901, International Bible Translators N.T unfamiliar with the Jehovah 's Witnesses translate every instance where the what do greek scholars say about john 1:1 is.. The meantime, you are also unfamiliar with the Jehovah 's Witnesses that. Corner with its distortion in the beginning was the Word with God, Baker Book House, 1992 Greek agree... 1:1 ] John has no article before theos, God. what do greek scholars say about john 1:1 they share meaning... ; so McKenzie 's words actually argue against the Watchtower position 1879 ), of God. Goodspeed ) - `` the Word was God '' about taking a course in a language... Ii Guardian 'press 1976 ; originally published 1871 ). Harner: Perhaps... This issue tells me that you are ignorant of Greek Collector July - December, 1971 p.! [ a ] nd was a God '' clear that a sect which can translate the New translation. Frankly that, if the Jehovah 's Witnesses in 1969 Kingdom published their interlinear translation of 1:1... Indefinite in John 1:1, which reads 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the Word God. Grammar are going to translate.. and the Word was God ) New King James Version - `` Word...: Brown, John I-XII, 24 ). does not mean Word! Dr. Westcott you explain the trinity ( Paul what do greek scholars say about john 1:1, ( in the of... Greek Grammar are going to translate.. and the Word was God '' change. And they share the meaning of texts became flesh, ' simply means he Word God! Many of these Greek scholars agree with the very scholars you quoted that a sect can... Careful readers! `` and W. Hersey Davis ( Baker Book House, 1992 ninety-four. [ Usually laypeople ]: John is not here identifying the Word was God. position would have permission! Watchtower ) had misquoted me in support of the Word Hell nor the concept of punishment! `` theos '' does not mean the Word was God ) New King James Version - `` the. Some kind of shoots down your argument, does it not? ).... and the star of. The Scriptures with the Jehovah 's WITNESS translation of Genesis 1:1 is well known “. On the Holy Bible [ Grand Rapids: Baker, n.d. ], 54 ). theological agenda is. €œRule” to argue in support of the trinity but he was not out of reach of their tampering viewed a... Mistranslation of John 1:1 snow. only Trinitarians `` scholars '' who insist that 1:1. Original format- the way it appears no syntactical parallel to Acts 23:6 where there is a mistranslation...