At John1:1 in the 1661KJV, the word God is capitalized two times,?

Question

yet the word translated into the english 'god' is of two different forms from the original Greek.(two different sets of vowel pointers)
When i look up the word in Strong's(Greek#2316) the primary meaning of the word theos is a quality of a person not a title.
Is it not a little deceptive to refer to this verse to try and support a trinitarian doctrine?

sorry i meant the 1611 KJV

Whynot, is just looked up the verse at 2 Cor 4:4;
you are right if we are to believe that the second form of theos is proof that Jesus is God at John 1:1, then it would mean that Satan is God at 2 Cor 4:4.

Answer 1

yay!
finally someone else on here is willing to use a reference book to examine the original language.
let me look it up, i'll be right back..

yes you are right, i have cross referenced this with two greek to english new testaments and the 1611KJV, and strong's.
It seems the second form of theos used at John1:1 is the same as used at 2 Corinthians 4:4 which of course is talking about Satan. So, with the understanding that the definition of theos can be a quality of a person one could conclude that Jesus is godly in the same sense that Satan is godly, yet neither of them are Almighty God.
Otherwise, one would have to believe that since the same form of theos is used to describe Satan would mean that Satan is actually god.

Answer 2

Yes! You are referring to the definite article (ho), it is not present in the second occurrence of "Theo's" and it is also placed before the verb in the sentence. This in-fact does change things all together. However, it is interesting to note that translators who erroneously translate John 1:1 as "the Word was God" do however render other passages where this same Greek grammar is used, correctly, case in point: John 6:70 Judas Iscariot is referred to "a devil" not 'The Devil'; also John 9:17 Jesus is described as "a prophet" not 'The Prophet' so we can see these translators have not been consistent.

This fact has been noted by many, ex: John J. McKenzie, S.J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: "John 1:1 should rigorously be translated 'the word was with the God (= the Father), and the word was a divine being.'"

Not to mention that the concept of a triune God is not supported by the Holy Bible, but rather is based in Greek philosophy.

I could go on but time won't allow it.

Answer 3

The two different forms are nominative and accusative - they are not different words. One is the object of a preposition and the other is the subject of a clause. And Strong's does not say that the primary meaning of theos is a quality - if that were true, the word would be an adjective, not a noun. Look it up again.

And any superficial study of the Greek language will show you that theos had been a standard term for the Supreme Being for centuries.

I am still confused about your point here. Are you trying to say that the other 'form' of theos in John 1:1 is an adjective? If so, you are mistaken. Theos is always a noun, and always means "Deity."

And what the heck is a "vowel pointer"?

Answer 4

I have an Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, there are indeed two spellings of the word translated into God, my keyboard does not have the Greek symbols spelling the words but the two spellings are different only by one symbol on the end of the words one translates God the other god, I compared these to known Scriptures and the one spelling god is also used where the word god (small letters) is referring to Satan as the god of this system of things, the other spelling of god (small letters) is were it refers to the Word or Jesus, this shows that indeed, Jesus is not God Almighty but a god.

Answer 5

This is what Strong's says,

2316 yeov theos theh’-os

of uncertain affinity; a deity, especially (with 3588) the supreme Divinity; TDNT-3:65,322; n m

AV-God 1320, god 13, godly 3, God-ward + 4214 2, misc 5; 1343

1) a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities
2) the Godhead, trinity
2a) God the Father, the first person in the trinity
2b) Christ, the second person of the trinity
2c) Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity
3) spoken of the only and true God
3a) refers to the things of God
3b) his counsels, interests, things due to him
4) whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way
4a) God’s representative or viceregent
4a1) of magistrates and judges

Looks like this word can be either God or god. Nice try.

grace2u

Answer 6

You mean the 1611 edition...I have that one. Its not trying to support the Trinity. Where did you get that idea?

Answer 7

So - the quality of a person doesn't describe a mighty God? God is a person - the distinction you are trying to descibe is splitting hairs and certainly does not disqualify a Trinity?

Answer 8

Think of this example: ice, water, steam, and slush. Three forms of the same thing. Ain't that a powerful analogy?

Answer 9

It wouldn't be the truth. Many believe in a doctrine but God is not a doctrine he is the truth.

Answer 10

There are many other flaws to the king James version of the bible...... that's why it's called a "version" and not a "translation",....