Spirituality
24 Aug 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritOf course, God is divine. Surely, John means "THE WORD" is divine. But John wrote "THE WORD" is GOD. The issue in dispute here is only the following question:
there is an indefinite article in koine greek. they do it by leaving out the definite article. other languages of antiquity used the same format.
[quote]
What has happened in the case of the Watchtower's New World Translation is that [b]they have added the indefinte article "a" before God, when the original Greek does not have an indefinte arti capacity to figure it out on your own, but i'll give you a chance to prove yourself.[/b]
Should the English translator add the English indefinite article "a" due to the lack of a definite article in the Greek?
The experts say the article is the most tricky item in the greek language and that in the case of John 1:1 no article should be added in the English translation. Edward W. Goodrick says that when a Bible teacher makes something out of the fact the article appears or is absent, the listener should switch off his hearing aid, because all too often the teacher does not appreciate all the ramifications in the use of the article.
Here is part of what Robert H. Countess says in his book "The Jehovah's Witnesses' New Testament:
In the New testament there are 282 occurrences of the anarthrous Theos. (Anarthrous means the definite article is absent) At sixteen places NWT has either a god, god, gods, or godly. Sixteen out of 282 means that the translators were faithful to their translation principle six percent of the time.
He then writes of the table he made on another page to show the inconsistency in which the NWT has followed the principle enunciated in their John 1:1 appendix. Then he goes own to write the following:
The first section of John--1:1-18--furnishes a lucid example of NWT arbitrary dogmatism. Theos occurs eight times--verses 1, 2, 6, 12, 13, 18--and has the article only twice--verses 1, 2. Yet NWT six times translated "God," one "a god," and once "the god." In the latter instance NWT uses "the" where there is no article expressed in the Greek text!
Other examples are numerous which show the arbitrary manipulation of the article with words other than THEOS. For example, in Luke 11:24 NWT reads, "When an unclean spirit comes out of a man ..." where the Greek text reads "the unclean spirit" and "the man." On the other hand verse 27 in NWT, "and the breasts that you suck," interpolates an article before "breasts" where there is none in the Greek. Similarly, in james 1:25, "he who peers into the perfect law." one finds no article before "law" in the original. Examples like these could be multiplied at great length.
Where do you come off in claiming you know more than the experts?
31 Aug 12
Originally posted by galveston75I can not give you an example of someone actually praying to Jesus or the the Holy Spirit by using those names. However, there are prayers (communcations) to God and since Jesus, as the Son of God, and the Holy Spirit are persons in the Godhead, then any prayers to God are certainly filtered through these two persons of the Godhead. The Holy Spirit is said to be the one that changes our utterances to words acceptable to God.
Well yes he did say to pray only to his Father. Not one mention by him or any of his followers to pray to anyone else............ever.
Do you have any examples of anyone praying to Jesus?
Jesus said in John 14:14, "If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it."
Prayer is talking to God and communicating with Him and especially asking something of Him.
2 Corinthians 13:14 says, "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you all." In order to have fellowship with the Holy Spirit we must be able to talk to Him and prayer is talking to God.
We are certainly not forbidden to pray to any of the persons in the Godhead.
31 Aug 12
Originally posted by RJHindsShould You Pray to Jesus?
I can not give you an example of someone actually praying to Jesus or the the Holy Spirit by using those names. However, there are prayers (communcations) to God and since Jesus, as the Son of God, and the Holy Spirit are persons in the Godhead, then any prayers to God are certainly filtered through these two persons of the Godhead. The Holy Spirit is said ...[text shortened]... king to God.
We are certainly not forbidden to pray to any of the persons in the Godhead.
SOME people consider it proper to pray to Jesus. In Germany many have been taught as children that before their meals they should fold their hands and thank Jesus Christ.
According to the Bible, Jesus indeed occupies a very high position in heaven. Does that, however, mean that we should pray to him? You may be among those who, out of love for Jesus, direct prayers to him, but what does Jesus himself think about such prayers?
First, why do these questions even arise? Because the Bible says that Jehovah God is the “Hearer of prayer.” It is hardly surprising, then, that servants of God in ancient times, such as the Israelites, prayed only to Jehovah God, the Almighty.—Psalm 5:1, 2; 65:2.
Did things change when Jesus, the Son of God, came to earth to deliver mankind from sin and death? No, prayers were still directed to Jehovah. When on earth Jesus himself prayed frequently to his heavenly Father, and he taught others to do likewise. Just think of the model prayer, sometimes called the Lord’s Prayer or the Our Father, which is one of the best-known prayers in the world. Jesus did not teach us to pray to him; he gave us this model: “Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified.”—Matthew 6:6, 9; 26:39, 42.
A couple questions for you....
Who did Jesus tell us right here in this scripture to pray to and who's name did he tell us to us in that prayer? Was it Jesus's name? No it wasn't, it was God's name who is Jehovah as much as you hate that name. Bad move on your part but that's you decision.
But Jesus never ((((((((( once ))))))))) said to pray to himself or to the holy spirit in communicating with God.
Who did Jesus pray to when he was on the torture stake dying? Was it to himself, the holy spirit? No it was only to his Father Jehovah.
Also who did all the previous people of God pray too? Jehovah only. Not one mention ever of some three being god and that they should only pray to the one of this 3 being spirit.
31 Aug 12
Originally posted by RJHindsSure, I pass on your copy/paste proving that the definitve doctrinal belief required for being a Christian is trinitarianism and that everyone else who doesn't believe the same thing is going to hell. RJ says so.
Christians belief Christ is God in the flesh and that He is the Word came down from the Kingdom of Heaven. The Christian also believes that the Holy Spirit is God and the Father is also God, yet there is only one God. So the solution to this mystery of God is that there are three divine persons in one God -- the Triune God or for short, the Trinity. This ...[text shortened]... your own understanding, but rely on the understanding of the whole universal Christian church.
😕
31 Aug 12
Originally posted by galveston75I do not hate the name "Jehovah". All I have done was point out that the Biblical scholars know that "Jehovah" can not be the correct pronunciation and it is more likely "Yahweh" and we can't go wrong with the short form of "Yah". I also pointed out that the name "Jesus" is more likely to be "Yahshua". But regardless of that, Jehovah and Jesus can be considered the same God. So it should make no difference, if we use the wrong name for the Holy Spirit will correct our prayers if we are true believers.
Should You Pray to Jesus?
SOME people consider it proper to pray to Jesus. In Germany many have been taught as children that before their meals they should fold their hands and thank Jesus Christ.
According to the Bible, Jesus indeed occupies a very high position in heaven. Does that, however, mean that we should pray to him? You may be among those ...[text shortened]... r of some three being god and that they should only pray to the one of this 3 being spirit.
Jesus did indeed pray to the Father, but He never addressed His prayer to Jehovah, he always said, "Father" because "Jehovah" is not the name of the Father. And as I pointed out Jesus said, "ask ME" and not just ask in MY name.
So Jesus is not forbidding us to pray to Him, but is in fact telling us to ask Him for anything. So we don't need to worry about adding another sin to our total to be forgiven. It is okay. 😏
HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord!
01 Sep 12
Originally posted by RJHindsit's quiet easy and your "expert" hasn't settled the issue, he's just a critic of the jehova witnesses new testament, my claims have nothing to do with jehova witnesses or their bible.
Of course, God is divine. Surely, John means "THE WORD" is divine. But John wrote "THE WORD" is GOD. The issue in dispute here is only the following question:
Should the English translator add the English indefinite article "a" due to the lack of a definite article in the Greek?
The experts say the article is the most tricky item in the greek langua ...[text shortened]... Where do you come off in claiming you know more than the experts?
further, you still haven't figured out what logos means.
do you need more time?
01 Sep 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritIts Jehovahs Witnesses and the translation is the New world translation of the Holy
it's quiet easy and your "expert" hasn't settled the issue, he's just a critic of the jehova witnesses new testament, my claims have nothing to do with jehova witnesses or their bible.
further, you still haven't figured out what logos means.
do you need more time?
scriptures. The sahidic coptic text has the indefinite article and dates to the third
century and is based upon even earlier Greek manuscripts. Had John wanted to make
the term theos definite, meaning, the God, he simply could have put the Greek prefix,
ho in front of it, as it stands, the term theos, is a predicate noun, describing some
quality about the subject of the clause, in this instance the Word, or logos. Even if all
that were not so, the context could be used to logically demonstrate that the Word
could not be the God, for it states that no one has seen God at any time, when it would
be hard to argue that no one had seen Christ.
01 Sep 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOf course I agree that Theos is describing a quality of the Word and not His person. The person is the Son and the quality is God.
Its Jehovahs Witnesses and the translation is the New world translation of the Holy
scriptures. The sahidic coptic text has the indefinite article and dates to the third
century and is based upon even earlier Greek manuscripts. Had John wanted to make
the term theos definite, meaning, the God, he simply could have put the Greek prefix,
ho i ...[text shortened]... t no one has seen God at any time, when it would
be hard to argue that no one had seen Christ.
01 Sep 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHey Robbie. But you know I guess were all missing the point here with RJH and that is he "says it's so" even if he can't explain it. Sooooo I guess that's all that counts, "he says so" so it must be true.!
Its Jehovahs Witnesses and the translation is the New world translation of the Holy
scriptures. The sahidic coptic text has the indefinite article and dates to the third
century and is based upon even earlier Greek manuscripts. Had John wanted to make
the term theos definite, meaning, the God, he simply could have put the Greek prefix,
ho i ...[text shortened]... t no one has seen God at any time, when it would
be hard to argue that no one had seen Christ.
01 Sep 12
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75ahh dude, you know how pointless it is to try to reason with a trinitarian, they are like
Hey Robbie. But you know I guess were all missing the point here with RJH and that is he "says it's so" even if he can't explain it. Sooooo I guess that's all that counts, "he says so" so it must be true.!
concrete, all mixed up and hard as stone.
01 Sep 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieLol. Yep your right on that. My parents "used" to talk to our relatives on this and nothing but dead ends. But ya never know huh?
ahh dude, you know how pointless it is to try to reason with a trinitarian, they are like
concrete, all mixed up and hard as stone.
01 Sep 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritThe Logos is in reference to the beginning in Genesis in which God speaks things into existence. The Logos or Word refers to the Son, who creates things by saying them into existence. It is by the Word that in the beginning that all things were created. That is the reason John uses Logos to represent the Son, who was with God and was God in the beginning.
it's quiet easy and your "expert" hasn't settled the issue, he's just a critic of the jehova witnesses new testament, my claims have nothing to do with jehova witnesses or their bible.
further, you still haven't figured out what logos means.
do you need more time?
01 Sep 12
Jehovah's Witnesses deny the deity of Christ, and claim that John 1:1 merely calls him “a god,” but not full deity. They rest their case on three facts of Greek grammar:
There is no such word as “a” or “an” in Greek, so we sometimes have to add “a” to translate into English, (Acts 28:6).
The Greek word used here (theos) has two meanings: usually the supreme God revealed in Scripture, but sometimes lesser beings like the gods of Greek mythology.
The Greek word “the” is often attached to the word “God” or theos, but it does not appear in John 1:1. Hiding behind the Witness rendering of the verse is an unspoken equation: God + “the” (ho theos) = Jehovah, the Almighty God, God - “the” (theos) = a created being with divine qualities. Witnesses claim that the apostle John deliberately omitted a “the” in the final phrase to show the difference between God and the Word. As the New World Translation (p. 775) explains:
John's inspired writings and those of his fellow disciples show what the true idea is, namely, the Word or Logos is not God or the God, but is the Son of God, and hence is a god. That is why, at John 1:1,2, the apostle refers to God as the God and to the Word or Logos as a god, to show the difference between the Two.
Is this the proper translation?
No. The equation underlying the Witness rendering breaks down within a few verses. John 1:18 contains theos twice, without “the” either time. According to Watchtower assumptions, we would expect to translate both as “god” or “a god.” Instead, the New World Translation says “God” the first time and “god” the second time. The context overrules their rule.
Why did John choose not to put “the” on the word “God”?
To show which word was the subject of the sentence. In English, we can recognize the subject of a sentence by looking at word order. In Greek, we must look at the word endings. John 1:1 is trickier than most verses, because both “God” (theos) and “Word” (logos) have the same ending. The usual way to mark off the subject clearly was to add “the” to the subject and leave it off the direct object. That is precisely what John did here.
To conform to standard Greek grammar. E.C. Colwell demonstrated in an article in the Journal of Biblical Literature in 1933 that it was normal practice to omit “the” in this type of sentence. John was simply using good grammar, and making it clear that he intended to say, “The Word was God” rather than “God was the Word,” a statement with some theological drawbacks. John constructed his sentence in the one way that would preserve proper grammar and sound doctrine, declaring that “the Word was God.”
Author: Dr. John Bechtle
PS: Why do like 99.9% of scholars agree that the correct rendering is opposite what JW's claim ?
Manny