The New World Translation does not change John 1:1

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
EastwardTraveler
Student
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:43 am
Location: Atlanta, Ga

The New World Translation does not change John 1:1

Post #1

Post by EastwardTraveler »

Here is a thread I started on another forum, but wanted to put it up here as well. I am new here, but I am already enjoying this forum much better. Less trolls and better discussion and attitudes.
*********************************************

This is a response to a tread about John 1:1 and how the New World Translation corrects this mistake about calling the Word "God". The NWT claims to fix this issue by calling the Word "a god". Next the assertion is there are many gods in the Bible and being a god is different than being God, implying that God is not a god. Being a god is said to be more of a title or status, and nothing could be further from the truth.

First there is a word play here does not exist in the Hebrew. There is no capitalization in Hebrew, so in English terms, there is no big or little g. The context of the scripture would have let the reader know which god is being talked about. Even from a grammatical point of view this changes nothing. Here is what I mean. It is grammatically correct and scripturally correct for me to say that "God is a god". God is just a proper pronoun letting us know which god we are talking about. A god is not a status but the nature of something. God is a god because he happens to be a spiritually divine being.

So changing John 1:1 does not change the problem of the Word being called God. You are still left with a big problem of the identity of Jesus if he was by nature an elohim.

The next tactic that will be used to to bring up that there are many gods in the Bible. This is a silly argument, because all of the other gods of the Bible are false gods or men calling themselves gods. Neither of the two pleases God, so I find it odd that this is used to justify the Word being called a god/elohim and he not be God. Lets break it down even further. Just because men made up gods and created images to them, does not make them a real god. Same if a man calls himself or another person a god, it does not make them a true god. Again this does not please God to do so.

Here is my beleif, that God/elohim is the only real god/elohim in the scriptures. All other gods/elohim are false gods/elohim. No where in scripture is it a good thing to be call a god/elohim if the thing being talked about is not God himself.

While I started off mentioning The NWT I am eager to hear from all who do not believe that Jesus is God, not just Jehovahs Witness. I prefer not to hear from Trinitarians and Unitarians on this post, but ultimately am not opposed to it.

My last request is that for those responding, try and keep it short. I do not want a page of verses quoted and a dissertation on each on. Lets try and keep it to a verse or two at a time so we can actually have a discussion that is meaningful.

Thanks and look forward to hearing from all of you out there.

User avatar
tigger2
Sage
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 4:32 pm
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: My final stance and question on elohim

Post #61

Post by tigger2 »

[Replying to post 59 by brianbbs67]

The Tanakh (JPS):

"See, I place you in the role of God [elohim] to Pharaoh, with your brother Aaron as your prophet."

Here is the literal translation of Exodus 7:1 as found in the Hebrew text:

""see! I-made-you god to-pharaoh and-aaron brother-of-you he-is prophet-of-you."

brianbbs67
Guru
Posts: 1871
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:07 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: My final stance and question on elohim

Post #62

Post by brianbbs67 »

tigger2 wrote: [Replying to post 59 by brianbbs67]

The Tanakh (JPS):

"See, I place you in the role of God [elohim] to Pharaoh, with your brother Aaron as your prophet."

Here is the literal translation of Exodus 7:1 as found in the Hebrew text:

""see! I-made-you god to-pharaoh and-aaron brother-of-you he-is prophet-of-you."
What is your point? Both say the same to me. Do not the Hebrews know their language? Which would be why they would make it clear what was meant by those words? In English.

The reference footnote of 7:1 refers to 4:16 which footnotes the same and says:

and he shall speak for you to the people. Thus shall he serve as your spokesman, with you playing the role of Godc to him,

ImageIMG_0792 by brianbbs67, on Flickr

ImageIMG_0793 by brianbbs67, on Flickr

I see no other footnotes. And the word, Elohim, is not there in the JPS. Is in the Hebrew as it it one of the names of the only God.(they used it for Him)

EastwardTraveler
Student
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:43 am
Location: Atlanta, Ga

Post #63

Post by EastwardTraveler »

Hey guys, sorry I've been offline the past couple days. I've been on the mountains witha my fam. So I am yet to gand ready togo head to the airport and will have some lay overs. I should be able to get to most of your post today. I will probably get to a few of the shorter post first since I will mostly be on my tablet. I tried responding earlier on my tablet and it was is a pain. My grammar was terrible on some and trying to proof read and then change still creates other news how. I really was wondering how long it would take to get to Moses and we will cover it completely. There is also another verse I am surprised has not surfaced yet and it is dealing with the law, but we willbe get there In due time. I will give you guys a hint, it is one of the premiere dress that those scholars use to justify men and judges being called elohim. This is coupled with Psalms 82 as to further the point. Most do not use Moses for a very good reason and hope you guys are ready for this.

By the way I have really enjoyed this and thank you guys much for your time. I will explain better later when I get my laptop out and can better express myself. See you guys soon and take care.

FWI
Sage
Posts: 500
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:50 pm
Location: USA

Re: The New World Translation does not change John 1:1

Post #64

Post by FWI »

[Replying to post 1 by EastwardTraveler]

When we review the Greek word “Theos� (G2316) it is clear that this word is referring to the powerful, in the general sense. The word can be used to address: deities (gods and/or angels), governmental officials, judges and the Supreme Being. However, when a specific entity is being addressed for clarity’s sake, such as the Supreme Being, a variation of this Greek word is used, which is Theon. This variation is clear in John 1:1. Thus, the Greek word “Theon� is only used to address the Supreme Being and shows that no other fits into that category. Yet, to imply that no other deity or powerful being is addressed in John 1:1 would be incorrect.

Therefore, the NWT is correct in that sense. But, there is a problem with the storyline! Trinitarians support God as being three in one (simply put). Others support that there were two Gods and one gave up its’ divinity to become the Christ, while the NWT followers support the Christ as being an archangel who preexisted before his human birth. I do not support any of these beliefs, which relate to the Christ.

However, I do support that John 1:1 shows inclusion of the Christ as the only begotten of the One True God, not as an equal, but as a Son. This cannot be shown in the other above beliefs. So, the Christ is in John 1:1, but not as most believe him to be.

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 8904
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 1217 times
Been thanked: 305 times

Re: The New World Translation does not change John 1:1

Post #65

Post by onewithhim »

brianbbs67 wrote:
onewithhim wrote: [Replying to post 23 by brianbbs67]

So, Brian, what is your point? It's a burden, really, to read through all of those scriptures and then not find any summary by you.
Did not mean to burden you. And I was trying to keep it short like the OP asked. I posted a list of a few verses that state, YHWH is the one true god. The God of Hosts, which I always thought was the meaning of El oh im? So, while their are other worldly beings in the host of heaven, God is in charge.
That is absolutely right, Brian. YHWH is the one true God. "Elohim" doesn't mean "the one true God." It has the meaning of "a mighty one, or a strong one." It is used to refer to other gods, as at Exodus 15:11. It is also used as the plural of majesty and excellence, as at Psalm 89:6, which refers to the angels in comparison with YHWH.

Most often it is used to denote "a plurality of majesty, or dignity, or excellence." It is, as indicated before, applied to YHWH himself, to angels (Psalm 8:5), to false gods (Exodus 12:12; 20:23), and to men (Psalm 82:1,6). Of course YHWH is the true God and the one that is the most majestic and excellent.

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 8904
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 1217 times
Been thanked: 305 times

Post #66

Post by onewithhim »

brianbbs67 wrote: What about Isaiah 46:9 JPS ...for I am God, and there is none else, I am divine, and there is none like Me.?
Certainly. We have been saying that all along. YHWH is THE Most High, the one TRUE God.

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 8904
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 1217 times
Been thanked: 305 times

Re: My final stance and question on elohim

Post #67

Post by onewithhim »

brianbbs67 wrote: [Replying to post 57 by JehovahsWitness]

Exodus 7:1. The Lord replied to Moses, "See, I place you in the role of God to Pharaoh, with your brother Aaron as your prophet." JPS

That should make it obvious that He didn't make Moses a god, just let him play a role. As all other human gods are imaginary.

God is saying, what are you complaining about Moses? I am letting you play god...

This is just one example of a repeated theme, especially in the Tanakh, about other gods not existing. It is also why I hold the Tanakh as superior for OT text. Besides the fact of less translating going on and the 3000 year understanding of the Hebrews, of which we(followers of Christ) are now a sect.

God made His Host. He did not make other gods to compete with Him. He did make some vessels to honor and others to dishonor. Satan is a fallen angel(messenger) who is our adversary. He is granted certain powers to God's purpose, but is never a god as you said earlier.
Yes Satan IS a "god," as a god simply means an important, powerful individual. He is called "god" at 2 Corinthians 4:4: "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them that believe not..." (KJV)

Your point about Moses is an excellent observation. God himself calls Moses "God" to Israel. He certainly was not THE God, YHWH himself. Then why do people insist that when Christ is called "god" (at John 1:1) HE is God Almighty? Christ is no more God Almighty than Moses was. Yet they are BOTH referred to as a "god."

brianbbs67
Guru
Posts: 1871
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:07 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #68

Post by brianbbs67 »

I guess I should define what I hold the meaning of a god is.

It is not someone labeled as such. It is an entity coequal to the power Of YHWH. There are none of those. So, the rest fall to the category of false gods. They can't do or deliver all that God does. Even if, they are from the heavens casted down here. The whole down casting thing should show their place in supremicy.

If we can cast them off, as God did, why should they be labeled as gods? They have no more power than we give them. Misnomer at best.

2timothy316
Under Probation
Posts: 4161
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 10:51 am
Has thanked: 175 times
Been thanked: 457 times

Post #69

Post by 2timothy316 »

brianbbs67 wrote:
It is not someone labeled as such. It is an entity coequal to the power Of YHWH. There are none of those. So, the rest fall to the category of false gods. They can't do or deliver all that God does. Even if, they are from the heavens casted down here. The whole down casting thing should show their place in supremicy.

If we can cast them off, as God did, why should they be labeled as gods? They have no more power than we give them. Misnomer at best.
All of this is 100% correct. That being said, we all might have our own idea of what the definition of what a 'god' is. Yet, when it comes to the Bible who are we to argue what the Almighty God defines what a god is? According to the Bible, anything that we attribute as being more powerful than us is a god. False indeed but still it still holds power over us. False is referring to the path that 'god' leads down or what they stand for. Satan stands for selfishness and will try convince us that his path will lead to our happiness. This is false. Philippians 3:19 even says our belly or appetites can be a god. We might look to ourselves as gods, deciding that we can determine our own path to happiness and peace. This too is false.

So while your definition of a God is not completely wrong as you're equating God with Almighty God and that is where you are correct. Yet according to the Bible not every god is Almighty God. That is why in the Bible Jehovah makes a clear definition as to what kind of God HE is. 'The Almighty' (Rev 1:8) and 'the only True God' (John 17:1, 3). This is not Satan or our stomachs. The Almighty is above all others of power and only His paths lead to happiness and peace. Is this not what you know as God? If so that is good. But not all those 'gods' can be Almighty but they can be mightier than a human or even all humans combined, like Satan.

This is why the Bible clearly tells us His name. (Ps 83:18) Tells us His plans and tells us what His defining qualities are. (1 John 4:8, Isaiah 48:17 and Gal 5:22, 23) He wants to stand out from these false gods if they have real power like Satan or a god that we give power such as our own appetites. Satan is trying to make the One True God's name obscured and to convince us that the Almighty God's ways are bad.

brianbbs67
Guru
Posts: 1871
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:07 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #70

Post by brianbbs67 »

2timothy316 wrote:
This is why the Bible clearly tells us His name. (Ps 83:18) Tells us His plans and tells us what His defining qualities are. (1 John 4:8, Isaiah 48:17 and Gal 5:22, 23) He wants to stand out from these false gods if they have real power like Satan or a god that we give power such as our own appetites. Satan is trying to make the One True God's name obscured and to convince us that the Almighty God's ways are bad.
I agree but, Ha'Satan, only means the High Adversary. Its not his name, proper. Even in the Talmud stories, the best I have seen so far besides that is a label of sublime Seraphin. I also believe this world, as we see it, is not completely as it is. We have scales on our eyes and need God to open them. Which He will from time to time for some.

Post Reply