Just WHO is God?

[MadJW]

In world religion there all kinds of Gods.
I, personally, have examined most of them and found them lacking.
Then I come to 'Christian' religion, and find that the majority of them don't know God at ALL!
I think one can have a serious debate on THIS site!

The Bible= Jehovah (Name removed by most 'Christian' churches)
Churchianity= there's Three!

[tigger 2]

[Replying to Miles in post #20]

We are talking about John's use of the Greek at John 1:1c and how it can be honestly translated. My studies, which you apparently will not actually examine, explain all your questions. It appears that you do not address the NT Greek at all, but are simply referencing English 'translations' by trinitarians who don't like what the Greek of John 1:1c literally says.

Here is a trinitarian interlinear which show the actual Greek. The beginning capitalization of words in the English portion is strictly translator's choice since it was not in the original NT Greek. https://www.studylight.org/interlinear- ... ohn/1.html

Here's another: https://studybible.info/IGNT/John

[Miles]

[Replying to Miles in post #20]

We are talking about John's use of the Greek at John 1:1c and how it can be honestly translated. My studies, which you apparently will not actually examine, explain all your questions. It appears that you do not address the NT Greek at all, but are simply referencing English 'translations' by trinitarians who don't like what the Greek of John 1:1c literally says.

You may be talking about John's use of the Greek at John 1:1c, but I was replying to your comment "All the uses of "God" you have chosen have the definite article ("the") before them. If you don't want replies to your comments, don't make them.

.

[tigger 2]

[Replying to Miles in post #20]

Post #19 (and the actual studies themselves which you are still ignoring) makes it clear that I am examining the NT Greek used by John.

[onewithhim]

.
Not understanding. Exactly what does "The Word was god" mean? How can a word be god? Could the Word have been anything else other than god? Was god anything more than the Word?


.

Both Moses and Jesus represented Jeovah at that time, and are thus called God because that's where they got their Authority,

Maybe someone else will take a stab at answering my questions.

1. Exactly what does "The Word was god" mean?

2. How can a word be god?

3. Could the Word have been anything else other than god?

4. Was god anything more than the Word?

.

"The Word was god" is to be translated according to rules for rendering Greek into English. One rule is to add an "a" in front of that god.

Then why isn't there an "a" in front of "God" in Genesis 1:3?

.......3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

OR an "a" in front of "God" in 2 Chronicles 22:7

.......7 But God brought about the downfall of A·ha·ziʹah by his coming to Je·hoʹram;

Or an "a" in front of "God" in Romans 4:20

.......20 But because of the promise of God, he did not waver in a lack of faith;

The Word was Jesus, and he was "a god," or, a revered, important, powerful individual.

"Was a god" implies Jesus could very well be a god among at least one other god, and even among many, many gods. Whereas saying "The Word was Jesus, and he was 'god,'. . . . ." implies there there is only one god. Just like the difference between "being President of the USA" and "being a President of the USA." The "a" only functions to indicate other gods, but maybe this is what you mean; there were other gods around. Yes? No?

.

YES, as we have been explaining, ad nauseum. The word "god" just means an important, powerful person, and judges, governors, even angels are referred to as "gods." That is why an article must be placed before the Greek noun "god" in the first part of verse 1 of John. That article tells us that the "god" is the one and only, and, according to Jesus, that god is his Father: "Now this is everlasting life, that they may know thee, the only true God, and him whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ." (John 17:3, Holy Family Edition of the Catholic Bible)

[tigger 2]

In the NT Greek, any singular nominative count noun ("house," "prophet," "woman," "lamb," "god," etc.) which does not have a definite article and which is not part of a prepositional phrase will be given an indefinite article ("a/an") by the translator rendering it into English.
...............................................
Literal Translation of John 1:1c
Even the trinitarian Greek expert, W. E. Vine, (although, for obvious reasons, he chooses not to accept it as the proper interpretation) admits that the literal translation of John 1:1c is: “a god was the Word”. - p. 490, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1983 printing.

Equally trinitarian Professor C. H. Dodd, director of the New English Bible project, also admits this is a proper literal translation:
“A possible translation [for John 1:1c] ... would be, ‘The Word was a god.’ As a word-for-word translation it cannot be faulted.” - Technical Papers for the Bible Translator, vol. 28, Jan. 1977.

The reason Prof. Dodd rejected “a god” as the actual meaning intended by John is simply because it upset his trinitarian interpretations of John’s Gospel!

Rev. J. W. Wenham wrote in his The Elements of New Testament Greek: “Therefore as far as grammar alone is concerned, such a sentence could be printed: θεὸς ἐστιν ὁ λόγος, which would mean either, ‘The Word is a god’, or, ‘The Word is the god [God]’.” - p. 35, Cambridge University Press, 1965.

"In John i.1 (θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος), the article could not have been omitted if John had wished to designate the λόγος as ὁ θεὸς, because in such a connexion θεὸς without the article would be ambiguous." - A treatise on the grammar of New Testament Greek : regarded as a sure basis for New Testament exegesis, p. 151, G. B. Winer.

(Of course if you carefully examine the rest of this study, you will find that the grammar really shows that ‘The Word is [or “was” in John 1:1c] a god’ is what John intended.)

Trinitarian NT scholar Prof. Murray J. Harris also admits that grammatically John 1:1c may be properly translated, ‘the Word was a god,’ but his trinitarian bias makes him claim that “John’s monotheism” will not allow such an interpretation. - p. 60, Jesus as God, Baker Book House, 1992. However, his acknowledgment of the use of “god” for men at John 10:34-36 and the use of “god/gods” for angels, judges, and other men in the Hebrew OT Scriptures contradicts his above excuse for not accepting the literal translation. - p. 202, Jesus as God.

And Dr. J. D. BeDuhn in his Truth in Translation states about John 1:1c:
“ ‘And the Word was a god.’ The preponderance of evidence from Greek grammar… supports this translation.” - p. 132, University Press of America, Inc., 2003.

Trinitarian Dr. Robert Young admits that a more literal translation of John 1:1c is “and a God[2] (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word” - p. 54, (‘New Covenant’ section), Young’s Concise Critical Bible Commentary, Baker Book House, 1977 printing.

And highly respected trinitarian scholar, author, and Bible translator, Dr. William Barclay wrote: “You could translate [John 1:1c], so far as the Greek goes: ‘the Word was a God’; but it seems obvious that this is so much against the whole of the rest of the New Testament that it is wrong.” - p. 205, Ever yours, edited by C. L. Rawlins, Labarum Publ., 1985.

You see, in ancient times many of God’s servants had no qualms about using the word “god” or “gods” for godly men, kings, judges, and even angels.

[Miles]

In the NT Greek, any singular nominative count noun ("house," "prophet," "woman," "lamb," "god," etc.) which does not have a definite article and which is not part of a prepositional phrase will be given an indefinite article ("a/an") by the translator rendering it into English.
...............................................
Literal Translation of John 1:1c
Even the trinitarian Greek expert, W. E. Vine, (although, for obvious reasons, he chooses not to accept it as the proper interpretation) admits that the literal translation of John 1:1c is: “a god was the Word”. - p. 490, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1983 printing.

Equally trinitarian Professor C. H. Dodd, director of the New English Bible project, also admits this is a proper literal translation:
“A possible translation [for John 1:1c] ... would be, ‘The Word was a god.’ As a word-for-word translation it cannot be faulted.” - Technical Papers for the Bible Translator, vol. 28, Jan. 1977.

The reason Prof. Dodd rejected “a god” as the actual meaning intended by John is simply because it upset his trinitarian interpretations of John’s Gospel!

Rev. J. W. Wenham wrote in his The Elements of New Testament Greek: “Therefore as far as grammar alone is concerned, such a sentence could be printed: θεὸς ἐστιν ὁ λόγος, which would mean either, ‘The Word is a god’, or, ‘The Word is the god [God]’.” - p. 35, Cambridge University Press, 1965.

"In John i.1 (θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος), the article could not have been omitted if John had wished to designate the λόγος as ὁ θεὸς, because in such a connexion θεὸς without the article would be ambiguous." - A treatise on the grammar of New Testament Greek : regarded as a sure basis for New Testament exegesis, p. 151, G. B. Winer.

(Of course if you carefully examine the rest of this study, you will find that the grammar really shows that ‘The Word is [or “was” in John 1:1c] a god’ is what John intended.)

Trinitarian NT scholar Prof. Murray J. Harris also admits that grammatically John 1:1c may be properly translated, ‘the Word was a god,’ but his trinitarian bias makes him claim that “John’s monotheism” will not allow such an interpretation. - p. 60, Jesus as God, Baker Book House, 1992. However, his acknowledgment of the use of “god” for men at John 10:34-36 and the use of “god/gods” for angels, judges, and other men in the Hebrew OT Scriptures contradicts his above excuse for not accepting the literal translation. - p. 202, Jesus as God.

And Dr. J. D. BeDuhn in his Truth in Translation states about John 1:1c:
“ ‘And the Word was a god.’ The preponderance of evidence from Greek grammar… supports this translation.” - p. 132, University Press of America, Inc., 2003.

Trinitarian Dr. Robert Young admits that a more literal translation of John 1:1c is “and a God[2] (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word” - p. 54, (‘New Covenant’ section), Young’s Concise Critical Bible Commentary, Baker Book House, 1977 printing.

And highly respected trinitarian scholar, author, and Bible translator, Dr. William Barclay wrote: “You could translate [John 1:1c], so far as the Greek goes: ‘the Word was a God’; but it seems obvious that this is so much against the whole of the rest of the New Testament that it is wrong.” - p. 205, Ever yours, edited by C. L. Rawlins, Labarum Publ., 1985.

You see, in ancient times many of God’s servants had no qualms about using the word “god” or “gods” for godly men, kings, judges, and even angels.

Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the correct rendition is " . . . and the Word was a god." I'm still waiting for answers to my questions from post 5 (slightly amended):

1. Exactly what does "The Word was a god" mean?

2. How can a word be a god?

3. Could the Word have been anything else other than a god?

4. Was god anything more than the Word?

.

[onewithhim]

In the NT Greek, any singular nominative count noun ("house," "prophet," "woman," "lamb," "god," etc.) which does not have a definite article and which is not part of a prepositional phrase will be given an indefinite article ("a/an") by the translator rendering it into English.
...............................................
Literal Translation of John 1:1c
Even the trinitarian Greek expert, W. E. Vine, (although, for obvious reasons, he chooses not to accept it as the proper interpretation) admits that the literal translation of John 1:1c is: “a god was the Word”. - p. 490, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1983 printing.

Equally trinitarian Professor C. H. Dodd, director of the New English Bible project, also admits this is a proper literal translation:
“A possible translation [for John 1:1c] ... would be, ‘The Word was a god.’ As a word-for-word translation it cannot be faulted.” - Technical Papers for the Bible Translator, vol. 28, Jan. 1977.

The reason Prof. Dodd rejected “a god” as the actual meaning intended by John is simply because it upset his trinitarian interpretations of John’s Gospel!

Rev. J. W. Wenham wrote in his The Elements of New Testament Greek: “Therefore as far as grammar alone is concerned, such a sentence could be printed: θεὸς ἐστιν ὁ λόγος, which would mean either, ‘The Word is a god’, or, ‘The Word is the god [God]’.” - p. 35, Cambridge University Press, 1965.

"In John i.1 (θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος), the article could not have been omitted if John had wished to designate the λόγος as ὁ θεὸς, because in such a connexion θεὸς without the article would be ambiguous." - A treatise on the grammar of New Testament Greek : regarded as a sure basis for New Testament exegesis, p. 151, G. B. Winer.

(Of course if you carefully examine the rest of this study, you will find that the grammar really shows that ‘The Word is [or “was” in John 1:1c] a god’ is what John intended.)

Trinitarian NT scholar Prof. Murray J. Harris also admits that grammatically John 1:1c may be properly translated, ‘the Word was a god,’ but his trinitarian bias makes him claim that “John’s monotheism” will not allow such an interpretation. - p. 60, Jesus as God, Baker Book House, 1992. However, his acknowledgment of the use of “god” for men at John 10:34-36 and the use of “god/gods” for angels, judges, and other men in the Hebrew OT Scriptures contradicts his above excuse for not accepting the literal translation. - p. 202, Jesus as God.

And Dr. J. D. BeDuhn in his Truth in Translation states about John 1:1c:
“ ‘And the Word was a god.’ The preponderance of evidence from Greek grammar… supports this translation.” - p. 132, University Press of America, Inc., 2003.

Trinitarian Dr. Robert Young admits that a more literal translation of John 1:1c is “and a God[2] (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word” - p. 54, (‘New Covenant’ section), Young’s Concise Critical Bible Commentary, Baker Book House, 1977 printing.

And highly respected trinitarian scholar, author, and Bible translator, Dr. William Barclay wrote: “You could translate [John 1:1c], so far as the Greek goes: ‘the Word was a God’; but it seems obvious that this is so much against the whole of the rest of the New Testament that it is wrong.” - p. 205, Ever yours, edited by C. L. Rawlins, Labarum Publ., 1985.

You see, in ancient times many of God’s servants had no qualms about using the word “god” or “gods” for godly men, kings, judges, and even angels.

Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the correct rendition is " . . . and the Word was a god." I'm still waiting for answers to my questions from post 5 (slightly amended):

1. Exactly what does "The Word was a god" mean?

2. How can a word be a god?

3. Could the Word have been anything else other than a god?

4. Was god anything more than the Word?

.

I have answered you. Is my post something to ignore? I explained what "god" means and what John's audience would have understood in regard to it. No, the Word could not be anything else other that a god. He was and is an important, powerful individual, and that is what the basic meaning of "god" is.

[Purple Knight]

2. How can a word be god?

If the author knows very well what he's doing when he's sitting there writing words into being, and they are becoming a creation story.

Just food for thought. How I've always read it, anyway.

[2timothy316]

2. How can a word be god?

If the author knows very well what he's doing when he's sitting there writing words into being, and they are becoming a creation story.

Just food for thought. How I've always read it, anyway.

How can a person be a word...yet letters are that is exactly what we use to break down what a human is. We even have a term for it called 'genetic code' and this code is what makes us, us. We use letters and words for just about everything. Chemistry, math and yes to communicate ideas. The is what the Word does for God. Word is not what Jesus is, it's a tile and description.

[tigger 2]

[Replying to 2timothy316 in post #29]

It's not "a word." It's the Word."

See Rev. 19:13