John 1:1, considering the Greek of the above verse which disproves the assertion that Jesus is referred to as?

Question

John 1:1, considering the Greek of the above verse which disproves the assertion that Jesus is referred to as God in the verse. In the verse above, the first time the word God is used, the Greek is "TON THEOS", which means "a god". However, the stronger Greek word "HO THEOS" which means "Divine God" was used for satan in 2 Corinthians 4:4. The NIV Bible Author wrote "god" for Satan instead of "God", which the word itself literally means The God. The second time the word God is used,"....and the word was God," the word for God is TONTHEOS, which also means "a god". a literal greek translation: look In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was A God."
Europeans have evolved a system of capital and small letters non-existent in Greek. The God, HOTHEOS is translated as God with a capital G, whereas Tontheos, which means A or ANY God is translated with a small g, god.

Answer 1

The Gospel According to Saint John
Chapter 1

1) en arch hn o logoV kai o logoV hn proV ton qeon kai qeoV hn o logoV

1:1) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 Cor. 4.4
4) en oiV o qeoV tou aiwnoV toutou etuflwsen ta nohmata twn apistwn eiV to mh augasai autoiV ton fwtismon tou euaggeliou thV doxhV tou cristou oV estin eikwn tou qeou

4:4) In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

Where in 2 Cor, does this refer to satan as a God?


Sense your a Greek scholar. You should understand this.

Jesus is in fact God. Read it.
.

Answer 2

I can agree with what you are trying to say, just not how you said it.

As to explaining what John is trying to say at John 1:1, you might want to read.

Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament.
by
Jason BeDuhn
Associate Professor of Religious Studies, and Chair
Department of Humanities, Arts, and Religion
Northern Arizona University

"It is true that the most formal, literal translation of the words in John 1:1c would be "and the Word was a god." The grammatical rules involved in this passage weigh very heavily against the more commonly seen, traditional translation, "and the Word was God." However, translation is not only about rendering a passage word-for-word. It involves also consideration of broader syntax and the meaning of a passage as a whole.

"The grammatical construction used here can be called the qualitative or categorical use of the indefinite. Basically, that means x belongs to the category y, or "x is a y." The examples I used in a letter now widely circulated are "Snoopy is a dog"; "The car is a Volkswagen"; and "John is a smart person." The common translation "The Word was God" is as erroneous for this construction as it would be to say in English "Snoopy is dog"; "The car is Volkswagen"; or "John is smart person." The indefinite article is mandatory because we are talking about a member of a class or category.

"The bottom line is that "The Word was a god" is exactly what the Greek says. "The Word was divine" is a possible meaning of this Greek phrasing. "The Word was God" is almost certainly ruled out by the phrasing John uses, and it is not equivalent to "The Word was divine" because without any justification in the original Greek it narrows the meaning from a quality or category (god/divine) to an individual (God)."



(so much for "nowhere else and no one else" and by the way he is not a Jehovah's Witness nor was he hired by Jehovah's Witnesses.)

And other comments:

The usual defence is that QEOS is anarthrous (article dropped) because it is a predicate and preceeds the verb eimi (to be). (Colwell's rule).

"But BeDuhn seems to demolish this by citing other instances where the definite article is kept with a predicated nominative, including John 1:4: 'the light was the light of men' (also 6:51, 15:1, 20:15).

"I am stumped as to find an adequate rebuttal to BeDuhn - or maybe there isn't one. Anyone who has read his book will be in the best position to answer, though I hope others will have a contribution to.

"In raising all this, I do not want to get into a theological debate, nor an anti/pro-JW stance (I'm a Baptist); " By David Dewey.



I'm not a Greek expert, but I found Jason BeDuhn's reasoning to be very easy to follow.

Answer 3

didn’t the apostle John say that Jesus is himself God?’ In the King James version of the Bible, John 1:1 reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Some argue that this means that “the Word,” who was born on earth as the baby Jesus, is Almighty God himself. Is this true?

If this verse were interpreted to mean Jesus was himself God Almighty, it would contradict the preceding statement, “the Word was with God.” Someone who is “with” another person cannot be the same as that other person. Many Bible translations thus draw a distinction, making clear that the Word was not God Almighty. For example, a sampling of Bible translations say the following: “The Word was a God,” “a god was the Word,” and “the Word was divine.”

Bible verses that in the Greek language have a construction similar to that of John 1:1 use the expression “a god.” For example, when referring to Herod Agrippa I, the crowds shouted: ‘It is a god speaking.’ And when Paul survived a bite by a poisonous snake, the people said: “He is a god.” (Acts 12:22; 28:3-6) It is in harmony with both Greek grammar and Bible teaching to speak of the Word as, not God, but “a god.” John 1:1.

Consider how John identified “the Word” in the first chapter of his Gospel. “The Word became flesh and resided among us,” he wrote, “and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs [not to God but] to an only-begotten son from a father.” So “the Word,” who became flesh, lived on the earth as the man Jesus and was seen by people. Therefore, he could not have been Almighty God, regarding whom John says: “No man has seen God at any time.” John 1:14, 18.

Answer 4

Well, I'm afraid you're far off the subject. Your translation of Greek language is very poor (although, in principle, it is good to search things to their root, when in doubt). Reading your Q', it seems to me (but I may be wrong) that you're trying to prove something by asserting a deep linguistic knowledge that you yourself do not have and people that "hear" you, can not easily abject to it because they most probably do not have that insight either. If you are a real truth-seeker and want to know the scriptures for what tell, I'm sure the Spirit of God will lead you to the truth as it is in Jesus.

Feel free to contact me if you think that you want some proof for the errors you made in your translation.

btw (to refer to the least), where did you find the "TON THEOS" linguistic form? It is a grammatical violation of the language! It does not exist in ANY Greek text. The correct is "TON THEON". It is like saying, "I is" instead of "I am" (sorry, not a direct analogy).

Answer 5

nsafwb,
Ho is a definite article, and can have neutral OR feminine meaning. Theos means: a diety, with ho it changes to a supreme divinity. Which means of divine nature. Not equal to God, as Jesus is.

So nice try.

Keep searching in the Greek. You will find out that the Greek tells us that Jesus is of the same essence as God, making Him more than just an angel (Hebrews) and always existing as God (Gospel of John)

Answer 6

Ahh, so real. many human beings received't trust predestination inspite of what they study contained in the Bible because it isn't how they'd do issues in the experience that they were God or it really isn't any longer how a "loving God" would function. they have this photo of God of their minds it somewhat is who they prefer God to be and the way they imagine God must be, in spite of the indisputable fact that it's not the genuine God of the Bible. yet no, i do not somewhat see how human beings can argue very a lot with that verse, Paul is unquestionably fairly blunt throughout the time of all of Romans at the same time as he discusses this topic. How they miss it puzzles me.

Answer 7

It sounds to me like what we have here is a Greek translation according to the Brooklyn school of Greek interpretation.

Nowhere else and no one else in the whole world interprets Greek that way.

Jehovah's Winesses should hire a Greek language consultant to fix their flawed Bible and be done with it.

Answer 8

Do yourself a favor, learn Greek before posting such nonsense again. In John 1:1, "ton theos" is used because it is in the predicate (meaning after the verb). "ho theos" is nomative.

It is the English equavilent of knowing when to use "who" rather than "whom". Has absolutely nothing to do with one meaning "a" god and the other "the" god.

Answer 9

Your a Jehovah's Witless and you are flat out lying....or you are completly deceived by the Watchtower society.Your Greek is piss poor.
Satan means "accuser of the bretheren" not divine god .Nice try.All Koinea Greek was Capital letters,again...nice try.Oh and Jesus did rise bodily too,not as a ghost.(John 2 ,"Tear this temple down and in 3 days I will raise it up".John says "He was speaking of his BODY"
Luke 24(after the resurrection)"Handle me ,see a spirit does not have flesh and bone like you see I have".
Try reading a real Bible not that purple thing you read.

Answer 10

well i will give you the best translation from the NIV okay? it should be the way you just said it IF you are right....hold on

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning.

14The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only,[d] who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

PLEASE dont lie to prove a point anymore k :o}