Do Jehovah"s Witnesses correctly interpret John 1:1?

Question

Much of the doctrine for this group is centered around denying the Trinity. that's their right of course. However, do all JW's know how the New World translation of the bible distorts John 1:1?
Dr. Julius R. Mantey (who is even recognized by the Watchtower as a Greek scholar since they quote his book on page 1158 of their Kingdom Interlinear Translation): calls the Watchtower translation of John 1:1 "A grossly misleading translation. It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John l:1 'the Word was a god. 'But of all the scholars in the world, so far as we know, none have translated this verse as Jehovah's Witnesses have done." "I was disturbed because they (the Watchtower) had misquoted me in support of their translation. I called their attention to the fact that the whole body of the New Testament was against their view. Throughout the New Testament, Jesus is glorified and magnified--yet here they were denigrating Him and making Him into a little god of pagan concept . . .1 believe it's a terrible thing for a person to be deceived and go into eternity lost, forever lost because somebody deliberately misled him by distorting the Scripture!. . . Ninety-nine percent of the scholars of the world who know Greek and who have helped translate the Bible are in disagreement with the Jehovah's Witnesses. People who are looking for the truth ought to know what the majority of the scholars really believe. They should not allow themselves to be misled by the Jehovah's Witnesses and end up in hell." (Ron Rhodes "Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Jehovah's Witnesses" p.103-105)

Xazier, since you answered my question I'll tell you this. You're avatar tells me everything I need to know about you and why you are here.

Dr. Paul L. Kaufman (Portland OR.): "The Jehovah's Witness people evidence an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets of Greek grammar in their mistranslation of John 1:1."

Dr. Charles L. Feinberg (La Mirada CA.): "I can assure you that the rendering which the Jehovah's Witnesses give John 1:1 is not held by any reputable Greek scholar

James Moffatt: "'The Word was God . . .And the Word became flesh,' simply means he Word was divine . . . . And the Word became human.' The Nicene faith, in the Chalcedon definition, was intended to conserve both of these truths against theories that failed to present Jesus as truly God and truly man ...." Jesus Christ the Same (Abingdon-Cokesbury, 1945), p. 61.

E. C. Colwell: "...predicate nouns preceding the verb cannot be regarded as indefinite -or qualitative simply because they lack the article; it could be regarded as indefinite or qualitative only if this is demanded by the context,and in the case of John l:l this is not so." A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament," Journal of Biblical Literature, 52 (1933), p. 20

JR: is it true that JW's and the Waco branch davidians trace themsilves back to the Millerites of the early 1800's?
I'm referring to the Preacher named Miller,and his followers, who suffered several prophetic dissapointments, especially in 1844?

By the way JR, I know it was you. You know what I'm referring to.

Jehovah's Witnesses in 1969 Kingdom published their interlinear translation of the Greek Scriptures. The Watchtower has literally painted themselves in a corner with its distortion in the New World Translation of John 1:1. In their "New Kingdom Interlinear Translation" of John 1:1, they render the Greek text on the left side of the page more accurately: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was toward the God and god was the Word." However across the page in the right column, the "New World Translation" has, "In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God and the Word was A god." So they say the Greek states it this way, but we translate it another way. They subtly attempt to demote Christ to some kind of demigod, with a little g. (mighty and Jehovah the almighty). Isaiah 45:22, "For I am God and there is no other." The existing manuscripts of the New Testament were all written in capital letters so there are no distinctions in this lettering and no reason to change

Answer 1

I have listened to Dr Mantey on the topic, they have changed the bible to fit there teachings and not what the bible says its self. In there ignorance they have left out many other verses that speak to Jesus divinity. For example all the characteristics of God are given to Jesus and the holy spirit like forgiveness and Jesus resurrection. The only way to keep the original writings in check is to call upon the trinity, it is what GOd has given us to understand about his nature. However it is mans thought and falls short of truth, the only truth is what the bible says directly and they have changed that. You can find the trinity from the first page of the bible to the last. And if God tells us his nature is three persons than we must follow that teaching. to change it is to follow Satan.

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

THey have set them selfs up for some great sorrow. God will not allow the watchtower to get away with what they have done to people souls. One day they will be low and next to the people they have brainwashed. I do not know what will happen to them but it wont be nice. I pray that GOd has mercy on them and brings them to the true Jesus of the bible.

Answer 2

200-300AD - "a god was the Word" Coptic Translation.

(1) In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and a god was the Word.
Diaglot
1865 Diaglot NT
2) Harwood, 1768, "and was himself a divine person"
(3) Newcome, 1808, "and the word was a god"
(4) Thompson, 1829, "the Logos was a god
(5) Goodspeed, 1939, "the Word was divine
(6) Torrey, 1947, "the Word was god
(7) New English, 1961, "what God was,the Word was"
(8) Moffatt, 1972, "the Logos was divine
(9) Reijnier Rooleeuw, 1694, "and the Word was a god"
(10) Simple English Bible, "and the Message was Deity"
(11) Hermann Heinfetter, 1863, [A]s a god the Command was"
(12) Abner Kneeland, 1822, "The Word was a God"
(13) Robert Young, 1885, (Concise Commentary) "[A]nd a God (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word"
(14) Leicester Ambrose, 1879, "And the logos was a god"
(15) Charles A.L. Totten, 1900, "the Word was Deistic [=The Word was Godly]
(16) J.N. Jannaris, 1901, [A]nd was a god"
(17) George William Horner, 1911, [A]nd (a) God was the word"
(18) Ernest Findlay Scott, 1932, "[A]nd the Word was of divine nature"
(19) ames L. Tomanec, 1958, [T]he Word was a God"
(20) Philip Harner, 1974, "The Word had the same nature as God"
(21) Maximilian Zerwich S.J./Mary Grosvenor, 1974, "The Word was divine"
(22) Siegfried Schulz, 1975, "And a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word"
(23) Translator's NT, 1973, "The Word was with God and shared his nature
(24) Barclay, 1976, "the nature of the Word was the same as the nature of God"
(25) Schneider, 1978, "and godlike sort was the Logos
(26) Schonfield, 1985, "the Word was divine
(27) Revised English, 1989, "what God was, the Word was
(28) Cotton Parch Version, 1970, and the Idea and God were One
(29) Scholar's Version, 1993, "The Divine word and wisdom was there with God, and it was what God was
(30) Madsen, 1994, "the Word was a divine Being"
(31) Becker, 1979, "ein Gott war das Logos" [a God/god was the Logos/logos]
(32) Stage, 1907, "Das Wort war selbst gttlichen Wesens" [The Word/word was itself a divine Being/being].
(33) Bhmer, 1910, "Es war fest mit Gott verbunden, ja selbst gttlichen Wesens" [It was strongly linked to God, yes itself divine Being/being]
(34) Thimme, 1919, "Gott von Art war das Wort" [God of Kind/kind was the Word/word]
(35) Baumgarten et al, 1920, "Gott (von Art) war der Logos" [God (of Kind/kind) was the Logos/logos]
(36) Holzmann, 1926, "ein Gott war der Gedanke" [a God/god was the Thought/thought]
(37) Rittenlmeyer, 1938, "selbst ein Gott war das Wort" [itself a God/god was the Word/word]
(38) Lyder Brun (Norw. professor of NT theology), 1945, "Ordet var av guddomsart" [the Word was of divine kind]
(39) Pfaefflin, 1949, "war von gttlicher Wucht [was of divine Kind/kind]
(40) Albrecht, 1957, "gttlichen Wesen hatte das Wort" [godlike Being/being had the Word/word]
(41) Smit, 1960, "verdensordet var et guddommelig vesen" [the word of the world was a divine being]
(42) Menge, 1961, "Gott (= gttlichen Wesens) war das Wort"[God(=godlike Being/being) was the Word/word)
(43) Haenchen, 1980, "Gott (von Art) war der Logos" [God (of Kind/kind) was the Logos/logos]
(44) Die Bibel in heutigem Deutsch, 1982, "r war bei Gott und in allem Gott gleich"[He was with God and in all like God]
(45) Haenchen (tr. By R. Funk), 1984, "divine (of the category divinity)was the Logos"
(46) Schultz, 1987, "ein Gott (oder: Gott von Art) war das Wort" [a God/god (or: God/god of Kind/kind) was the Word/word].
(47) William Temple, Archbishop of York, 1933, "And the Word was divine."
(48) John Crellius, Latin form of German, 1631, "The Word of Speech was a God"
(49) Greek Orthodox /Arabic translation, 1983, "the word was with Allah[God] and the word was a god"
(50) Ervin Edward Stringfellow (Prof. of NT Language and Literature/Drake University, 1943, "And the Word was Divine"
(51) Robert Harvey, D.D., 1931 "and the Logos was divine (a divine being

Bias statements am I correct?


greg m.

Do you know the Coptic translators knew more about Greek then the common translators do? Do you know it was part of their common language? Do you think they didn't know what they were doing when they translated John 1:1 to "a god" years prior to any english translation?


Brian
JWs never banned organ transplants..

Michael M
Rev. Never said Jesus was the Alpha and the Omega. If you look in the Greek text, it actually says "Lord God" Not just "Lord"

Answer 3

Yes, better then n/e1 who believes in the trinity LIE!
I have personallly committed Many hours to research & study...UNBIASED.
I simply wanted the truth, of the matter.
I had no knowledge to begin w/.
So, I couldn't refute any knowledge,
but I could go and verify, where possible.
NONE of what u said has any truth to it in any way,
shape or form. U're giving the opinion of 'another man'!
U said: "Much of their doctrine 4 this group is centered around denying the Trinity"...what a Lie, an opinion...
(everybody's got 1; every1 also has a garbage chute,
doesn't mean any1 wants to see or hear what comes out).
Any1 who has EVER studied the Holy Scriptures w/ an earnest desire for truth;
w/ the Witnessess*
Knows for a fact that is an outright falsehood!!
If I were to pick 1...............
cuz the entire doctrine of J's W's is 'The Bible, itself';
({ya ding-bat} this is how ppl will know u're full of it**.)
God's name, YHWH's name being sanctified,
He is the Sovereign Lord of the universe, the Creator,
Jesus Christ is the Son of God,and the Reigning King,
the end of this system of things--Armageddon--
bringing in the Kingdom of God,
Paradise on earth, The Resurrection,
the way to salvation,
No immortal soul, no hellfire, no trinity,no clergy class,
all disciples are to preach the good news of God's Kingdom,
all disciples are ministers,
I GOTTA (stop&) Pick One......
O.K. got it;
God's oringinal purpose for mankind will be fulfilled,
it will not be late. I pick this 1.

BTW--Hell is the common grave of mankind.

I don't know how other J's W's stay so calm, collected?!?
@ times; in the face of so much disrespect?
Except to say;
J's W's Really Do HAVE YHWH'S BLESSING!
Not only, am I fighting & praying to stay level headed,
what do u say to a person, who spits out lies,
to put down & hide the truth?!?!?!
From the rest of mankind!
How irresponsible of YOU.
U choose ur life....let others do the same for themselves.
YOU are DISRESPECTING the true God?!?!
YOU are living in your lies,
forming urself into an enemy of God!
Like I told my hsbnd 1 day; in words that he could relate to:
You don't want to get into ~Heaven~ that's your choice,
BUT WHO R U!!
to stand there & kick the door shut in front of
(me & the kids) Any 1 Else On the Planet?!?!?!
That's what u r attempting...
hindering others from entering into God's Grace!
You are grossly misleading ppl.
Distorting facts.
You are not increasing the sheep of his fold, that's 4 sure.
You aren't displaying love.
Neither am I really, 4 that matter, but...Man, u make me hot.
(hot, as in displeasure, anger, fury...chalk it up to Zeal.)


*w/ the Witnessess; bc that's the issue You raised.
** DECEPTION.
~heaven~ of course, I know that's part of the lie of the immortality of the soul; as I said "in words he could relate to."

Answer 4

You mean the cult which has kept children from having necessary operations (organ transplants) and they died.

http://www.cftf.com/comments/kidsdied.html
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++==

Jesus is God, found In the New Testament.

John 1:1-3—“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him....” Jesus Christ existed with God prior to creation.

John 8:58—“Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM.. Jesus certainly did mean He is God - because the Jews wanted to stone Him for claiming to be God. 59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

Note: This is pointing back to Moses and the burning bush were Moses asks God for His name and he says “I AM”.

Matt 14:27, Mark 6:50; 13:6; 14:62; Luke 21:8; 22:70; John 4:26; 6:20; 8:24,28; 13:13,19; 18:5,6,8 ("I am He" is written in some translations which the translators added the word ‘he’.

John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him (Jesus), My LORD and my God.

Revelation 1:8—“I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty” (cf. Rev. 22:13).

Hebrews 1:3—“[Jesus Christ is] upholding all things by the word of his power.”

Colossians 1
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

Matthew 12:25, Matthew 27:18, Luke 6:8 —“Jesus knew their thoughts.”

Revelation 2
23 . … I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

Hebrews 13:8—“Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever”.

Worshipping Jesus
Revelation 5:8
And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

We read about the Holy Spirit in a number of verses, here is one.
Acts 19:2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

Answer 5

It is irrelevant whether jw interpret it incorrectly. The fact remain the canonized bible is the Latin Vulgate and John 1.1 is the Word is God". You may call another council to reverse the holy word God.

Answer 6

Mybalz izhary....Lol..that was too funny..

I have been here and asked this many times to them..They are deaf and blinded to the real truth..Their Bible has been rewritten for the most part..Many scholars disagree with their bible..But, they will take parts of their quotes out of context , making it seem as if they agree with their interpretation of it..namley John 1:1.

Answer 7

Seeing the trinity was introduced by Constantine the Great in 325AD then I would say the Jw's win

Answer 8

I agree with the scholars. I don't agree on any doctrine that is misleading about the fact that Jesus Christ was God made manifest in the flesh and died on that cross on calvary so that we could be free from our sins by repentence, baptism by immersion in the name of Jesus Christ, and the infilling of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues.

Answer 9

there's too much time spent "interpreting". "Be careful how you live your life. You may be the only "Bible" some people will ever read." The way you treat people says more about God, than reading , AD NAUSEUM, from a book.

Answer 10

To restate things slightly for the purpose of clarification, all doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses is centered around the Bible in its entirety. Thus we do not wrap any doctrine or belief around one scripture alone. We consider the entire body of God’s word on any given subject, including God’s identity, thus opening our ears and hearts to all of what God is trying to teach us. If we wrapped our belief around one particular scripture – to the exclusion of all others dealing with that subject – then we have left off seeking God’s truth and are seeking something else.

Commenting on the New World Translation being a scholarly work, Professor Benjamin Kedar of Israel said this in 1989: “In my linguistic research in connection with the Hebrew Bible and translations, I often refer to the English edition of what is known as the New World Translation. In so doing, I find my feeling repeatedly confirmed that this work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible. Giving evidence of a broad command of the original language, it renders the original words into a second language understandably without deviating unnecessarily from the specific structure of the Hebrew. . . . Every statement of language allows for a certain latitude in interpreting or translating. So the linguistic solution in any given case may be open to debate. But I have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain.”

John 1:1 is, of course, a particularly favorite scripture of many. Notably, it is a favorite of proponents of the Trinity doctrine which teaches that Jesus is God Almighty or Jehovah of the Old Testament. They are quite used to a translation which renders John 1:1, in part, as "the word was God." "Witnesses have rewritten John 1:1 to suit their own theology," say some. Is this really so? Have Witnesses taken unauthorized liberty in translating this verse? Are they the only ones who have ever translated John 1:1 in this fashion? No, not really. Though many Bibles read "…and the word was God", not all of them follow this form.

What about Mr. Mantey’s observation that “of all the scholars in the world, as far we know none have translated this verse as Jehovah’s Witnesses have done”? Apparently, Mr. Mantey is simply uninformed as can be seen from the citations below. Mr. Mantey’s state of being uninformed to one side, consider three:

The Bible – An American Translation by Smith & Goodspeed (1935) reads: "the word was Divine."

The New Translation of the Bible by James Moffatt (1934) reads: "the Logos was divine"

The New Testament in an Improved Version (NTIV 1808) reads: "the word was a god."

Now all of these translations predate the New World Translation. That being said, not only are Jehovah's Witnesses NOT unique in this translation, they neither introduced it nor invented it to support a peculiar theology. But of all Bible translations, your favorite as well as those above, which agrees with the context? Well, notice verse 18 which plainly states that NO MAN HAS EVER SEEN GOD. But verse 14 clearly states that "the word became flesh and resided among us. We have beheld his glory." Really, within the context of this particular scripture, what is John 1:1 saying?

According to Jesus' own words at John 10:35, no scripture can be nullified. So all scriptures which teach about the identity of Jesus and the identify of God must not be suffered to contradict or violate one another. Wherefore, John 1:1 must be harmonized with John 1:18 which must be harmonized with John 17:3 which must be harmonized with John 20:17 which must be harmonized with Revelation 3:12 which must be harmonized with Luke 4:8 which must be harmonized with the Bible in its entirety.

In view of the above, I respectfully ask, if we accept the doctrine of the Trinity, if we accept the teaching that Jesus Christ is God Almighty – Jehovah God – Yahweh - how do we reconcile all of these scriptures? How are we to understand them, each in the light of the other? How are we to understand the words of Jesus Christ himself?

If one were to come to the table with the Bible of his choice and do a careful reading of all scriptures dealing with God and Jesus Christ – and this independent of any reference whatsoever to the doctrine of the trinity – one should be guided to the very scriptural and inescapable conclusion that Jesus is just what he said he is – the son of God and not God Almighty.

This question arises on a fairly regular basis. And yet, I have never seen any Trinitarian explain the words of Jesus Christ at Luke 4:8, John 17:3, John 20:17, and Revelation 3:12.

Hannah J Paul