Christ Divinity Explained in John 1:1c

Christ Divinity Explained in John 1:1c


John 1:1 is the Beginning of Creation that supersedes Genesis 1:1. For example, we read, "When the morning stars joyfully cried out together, And all the sons of God began shouting in applause?" (Job 38:7)

Morning stars are among the first angels or the beginning angels of creation. Morning Stars and all the sons of God are the angels that existed before Abraham was and before the earth itself. After all, it was the newly created earth that they were applauding.

Jesus even admitted of coming from the gods whom the word of God came! Jesus answered them: “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said: “You are gods”’?  If he called ‘gods’ those against whom the word of God came—and yet the scripture cannot be nullified— do you say to me whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? (John 10:34-36)

The Hebrew and Greek languages often use feminine nouns to point to a creation. According to the strong concordance theos can be rendered two ways. One way, is in the Masculine sense as in the first instance of (John 1:1) But what about in the second instance as in John 1:1c? Isn't that scripture describing his qualitative sense? His divinity in being divine?

Strong's Concordance

theos: God, a god

Original Word: θεός, οῦ, ὁ

Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine; Noun, Masculine

Transliteration: theos

Phonetic Spelling: (theh'-os)

Short Definition: God, a god

Definition: (a) God, (b) a god, generally.



Many Scholars know this, but withhold the fact that theos can be rendered (a god) as it was with Paul and Moses. Other variations of rendering John 1:1 also exist:

1808: "and the Word was a god" – Thomas Belsham The New Testament

1822: "and the Word was a god" – The New Testament in Greek and English

1829: "and the Word was a god" – The Gospel History According to the Four Evangelists

1863: "and the Word was a god" – A Literal Translation (Herman Heinfetter)

1879: "and the Word was a god" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes (J. Becker, 1979)

1885: "and the Word was a god" – Concise Commentary on The Holy Bible (R. Young, 1885)

1911: "and the Word was a god" – The Coptic Version of the N.T. (G. W. Horner, 1911)

1935: "and the Word was divine" – An American Translation, John M. P. Smith & Edgar J. Goodspeed, Chicago

1955: "so the Word was divine" – The Authentic New Testament, by Hugh J. Schonfield, Aberdeen.

1958: "and the Word was a god" – The New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Anointed" (J. L. Tomanec, 1958);

1975 "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word" – Das Evangelium nach Johnnes, by Siegfried Schulz, Göttingen, Germany

1975: "and the Word was a god" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes (S. Schulz, 1975);

1978: "and godlike sort was the Logos" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider, Berlin


(en arche en ho logos) Words such as arche', godlike, wisdom, grace, divinity, or deity are all in the feminine sense.

The use of a feminine nouns emphasis the fact that the Word was created. When?

In the beginning was the Word . . . ”


Many religions teach that God has a beginning but if the truth be known, God is eternal.


Read more...

Tagged:

Comments

  • TruthTruth Posts: 421

    There above you have in writing the JW polygamy forbidden by YHWH.

  • BroRandoBroRando Posts: 496

     Brother Rando is a student of Prophecy and one of Jehovah's Witnesses. His interests are directed towards how the time of the end would come about. His Goal is to educate the public that Jehovah Witnesses have accepted the Sacrifice in Christ, whose Blood was shed for many as a ransom and exercise faith in 'Jesus Christ' for salvation. (Romans 10:9)

    Therefore, Jehovah Witnesses are the true worshippers who worship the God and Father of Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 1:3) We also adhere to the teachings of Jesus Christ to learn how His God and Father wants to be Worshipped.

    • "God is a Spirit, and those worshipping him must worship with spirit and truth.” (John 4:24)
    • "Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshippers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for indeed, the Father is looking for ones like these to worship him" (John 4:23)

    Surprised by Jesus witness about God, the Samaritan woman tells Jesus, “I know that Mes·siʹah is coming, who is called Christ. Whenever that one comes, he will declare all things to us openly.” (John 4:25)

    What was Jesus repsonse to the Samaritan woman about the Christ? " Jesus said to her: “I am he, the one speaking to you.” (John 4:26)

    Just think of it, Jesus was tired, thirsty, and hungry, and yet he was feeding the Samaritan woman spiritual truths about how His God and Father wants to be worshipped, with sprit and truth. When Jehovah Witnesses worship Jehovah, the God and Father of Jesus Christ, they are often persecuted and treated as outcasts and even imprisoned for their faith that Jesus Christ had given them.

    Jesus forewarned the true worshippers of his God and Father what is to come, since Jesus himself suffered from worshipping his God and Father with spirit and truth. "If the world hates you, you know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were part of the world, the world would be fond of what is its own. Now because you are no part of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, for this reason the world hates you. Keep in mind the word I said to you: A slave is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have observed my word, they will also observe yours. But they will do all these things against you on account of my name, because they do not know the One who sent me. (John 15:18-21)

    "Beloved ones, do not be surprised about the fiery trials that you are experiencing, as though something strange were happening to you.  On the contrary, go on rejoicing over the extent to which you are sharers in the sufferings of the Christ, so that you may rejoice and be overjoyed also during the revelation of his glory." (1 Peter 4:12-13)

     "For even though there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,”  there is actually to us one God, the Father, from whom all things are and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and we through him." (1 Corinthians 8:5-6).

  • C McC Mc Posts: 4,341

    @BroRando reported said:

     Brother Rando is a student of Prophecy and one of Jehovah's Witnesses. His interests are directed towards how the time of the end would come about. His Goal is to educate the public that Jehovah Witnesses have accepted the Sacrifice in Christ, whose Blood was shed for many as a ransom and exercise faith in 'Jesus Christ' for salvation. (Romans 10:9)

    Who wrote or posted this? The above sentence alone shows you're a slave to the JW website. It should have read: I am "a student of Prophecy" or  I, Brother Rando, "a student of Prophecy." Either of the sentences would have shown that an individual wrote it.  @BroRando, ARE YOU REAL? Better yet, who's posting JW's doctrines in  @BroRando 's name? This is deceptive and ashamed. This slip-up does more harm to JWs than your bruised ego.

    You are NOT a person! You are a member of the JW governing body, posing as a person. You have been exposed! This explains why your pass posts were so mechanical, and you couldn't respond directly to any questions asked. This site (CD) is not for JW Church officials masking as an individual. Jan needs to look into this immediately! 

    Just recently, someone tried to embody @BroRando. I wonder if  @Bill_Coley  observed or knew about this? Why would an organization do this kind of thing? CM


    PS.  @Bill_Coleyyou want justice, fairness, and to be a mediator in CDfind the truth to authenticate  @BroRando  is a person or a committee. Until then, he is a fake and fraud not worth any poster's time.

  • TruthTruth Posts: 421

    I think his cheese has fallen off his cracker. "With some, make a differnce."

  • BroRandoBroRando Posts: 496

    Jehovah Witnesses have accepted the Sacrifice in Christ, whose Blood was shed for many as a ransom and exercise faith in 'Jesus Christ' for salvation. (Romans 10:9)

    Why would this scripture send trintarians into a frenzy? If you read this scripture, it entitles the beleiver to be saved. The trinty never publically anounces Jesus Christ as Lord and trinitarians don't believe in their heart that God resurrected Jesus from the DEAD.

    Acts 4:2

    These were annoyed because the apostles were teaching the people and were openly declaring the resurrection of Jesus from the dead.

  • Bill_ColeyBill_Coley Posts: 2,583

    @C Mc posted:

    Just recently, someone tried to embody @BroRando. I wonder if  @Bill_Coley  observed or knew about this? Why would an organization do this kind of thing?

    PS.  @Bill_Coleyyou want justice, fairness, and to be a mediator in CDfind the truth to authenticate  @BroRando  is a person or a committee. Until then, he is a fake and fraud not worth any poster's time.

    I know nothing more about @BroRando than you do, if what you know is what he has revealed in his posts and is available on the website to which he has linked in his posts.

    As for your P.S., it's not my responsibility in these forums to authenticate any participant's ID, whether @BroRando's, @Truth's, or any other poster's, regardless of the questions that arise about their identities.

  • TruthTruth Posts: 421

    Such a post seems odd. What am I missing? Something is afoot that is greased up so well that I’m not getting it.

  • C McC Mc Posts: 4,341

    @Bill_Coley said to @C Mc:

    As for your P.S., it's not my responsibility in these forums to authenticate any participant's ID, whether @BroRando's, @Truth's, or any other poster's, regardless of the questions that arise about their identities.

    Bill,

    You are correct, "it's not my responsibility in these forums to authenticate any participant's ID...". I am sorry to have asked or imposed this upon you. Let peace abide between us. Va bene? CM

  • Bill_ColeyBill_Coley Posts: 2,583

    @C Mc posted:

    You are correct, "it's not my responsibility in these forums to authenticate any participant's ID...". I am sorry to have asked or imposed this upon you. Let peace abide between us. Va bene?

    The ID authentication matter was water well under the bridge for me, but thanks for the apology, which of course I accept.

    "Va bene?" Si.

  • C McC Mc Posts: 4,341

    CD Posters,

    The Chairman has spoken will give  @BroRando a pass to continue sharing and directing links to the JWs website. So, please, join me in getting back to the OP of this thread or reasonably close to it. I say this assuming  @BroRando  satisfied  @Jan with his ability to function as human intelligence vs. "artificial intelligence."

    It's no secret that JWs, currently, teach as many as possible that John 1:1 defines Jesus as "a god" to the chagrin of "orthodoxy." They baked it into their biased and flawed "Bible" called the New World Translation (NWT). Its translators were less than equipped to take on the scholarship demanded. Up to 1950, JWs acknowledged and worshiped Jesus as God. To justify their Arian views of Jesus and other spurious doctrines, JWs can come up with a plan to have their own Bible Translation (NWT).

    So, let's look at the NWT and John 1:1. We must first go to Genesis 1:1 -- “In the beginning God created.

    • “God” (Elohim) is plural.
    • “Created” is singular (Heb: He created)
    • Did God make a grammatical mistake?
    • Same as saying “They was. ”
    • God is a plurality and a singularity.
    • The God of the Bible is three in one.
    • Father, Son and Holy Spirit = One God


    In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

    • Universe is time, space, matter
    • “In the beginning…” = Time
    • “. . . God created the heavens…” = Space
    • “. . . And the earth. ” = Matter
    • Time = Past, Present, Future
    • Space = Width, Depth, Height
    • Matter = Solid, Liquid, Gas


    JW’S SUBTRACT FROM THE BIBLE

    • Jesus was not Jehovah God.
    • He was the first son that Jehovah God brought forth. (Michael the Archangel)
    • Jesus was truly man, but not YWHW God.
    • Jesus was a god, but not Jehovah God.
    • Jesus had pre-existence, but not eternal.
    • Jesus was the first creation of God.


    IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD, AND THE WORD WAS WITH GOD, AND THE WORD WAS GOD (John 1: 1).

    • The JW’s version of the Bible (New World Translation) erroneously states: “…and the word was a god. ”
    • Breaks a rule of Greek grammar: Colwell’s rule = “God” is an anarthrous (no article for emphasis) predicate nominative!
    • Jesus is the Word, Jesus is GOD (emphatic)


    JOHN 1: 1 DOES NOT TEACH POLYTHEISM!!!

    • The JW’s New World Translation version of the Bible teaches that the Lord Jesus is an inferior god to Jehovah God.
    • This makes JW’s polytheists (many gods)
    • Jesus claimed to be God: “I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am He, ye shall die in your sins (John 8:24).


     @BroRando, is there any part of this post inaccurate. I didn't say whether you accept it or not. Now, can you see why mainstream Christianity is so passionate about Jesus? It's biblical without the INSERTIONS or the SUBTRACTIONS. Let's keep searching for truth and studying for understanding. CM




    SOURCE:

    Jesus Christ -vs- jehovah's Witnesses

  • BroRandoBroRando Posts: 496
    edited December 7


    I can debunk your whole argument with two scriptures.

    •  Simon Peter answered: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” (Matthew 16:16)
    • "Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son." (1 John 2:22)


  • TruthTruth Posts: 421

    The JW tweaked Bible also adds to their Bible “Christ” where scholars agree it almost certainly does not exist.

  • PagesPages Posts: 96

    @BroRando

    Let's proceed through the grammar of John 1:1, clause by clause, within the immediate context in which it was written (vv.1-18).

    In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

    Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος

    A single question to start:

    In this first clause, Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, I would like to ask what affect the use of the imperfect ἦν has on your understanding of Ἐν ἀρχῇ?

  • Bill_ColeyBill_Coley Posts: 2,583

    @Pages posted:

    Let's proceed through the grammar of John 1:1, clause by clause, within the immediate context in which it was written (vv.1-18).

    Well, I'm not in ANY way equipped to enter this ongoing and newly-moved original languages exchange between @Pages and @BroRando, but I am equipped to give you both props for the content of your posts and the manner in which you have conducted your exchange.

    I am not an original languages person at all, so your discussion is WAY out of my league, but I've followed as best I could, or at least closely enough to be impressed by what you've created: an exchange that has reflected the very essence of these forums' expectation that we discuss/critique ideas, not people.

    As an outsider(!) I say to you both, well done and thanks for the model.

  • PagesPages Posts: 96

    @Bill_Coley

    Well, I'm not in ANY way equipped to enter this ongoing and newly-moved original languages exchange between @Pages and @BroRando, but I am equipped to give you both props for the content of your posts and the manner in which you have conducted your exchange.

    I am not an original languages person at all, so your discussion is WAY out of my league, but I've followed as best I could, or at least closely enough to be impressed by what you've created: an exchange that has reflected the very essence of these forums' expectation that we discuss/critique ideas, not people.

    As an outsider(!) I say to you both, well done and thanks for the model.

    Thank you for your encouraging words!

  • C McC Mc Posts: 4,341

     @Bill_Coley  said to  @Pages  his purposed exchange with  @BroRando  on John 1:1

    "... I'm not in ANY way equipped to enter this ongoing and newly-moved original languages exchange..."

     @Pages,

    I, too, would like to thank you for your efforts to establish some reasonable (intelligence) exchanges with  @BroRando. Where I am unable to succeed, I wish you well in your endeavors. Since the Chairman, Jan's remarks, you have seen my recent efforts to reach (since the Chairman, Jan's remarks) out to  @BroRando  here and around the forums. To my dismay, the said party remains unwilling or incapable of appropriate exchanges on the topic (opened records).

    Once again, as a recent pattern, we hear from  @Bill_Coley  once again before  @BroRando, just an observation.  @Bill_Coley 's statement tells me two things:

    1. He will not be able to contribute to the conversation in any substantive way.
    2.  @Bill_Coley 's statement reminds me of the Committee members who crafted the New World "Bible" (NWT). The translators were woefully inadequate ("in ANY way equipped"), possibly except one. It's no secret they (translators) were religious partisans in an arena where a working knowledge of Greek and Hebrews was required. This is not to disparage Bill for his hindrances. It's a good thing when a man knows his limitations. He is wise.

    Primarily as an observer, I want you to exceed. I encourage you to remain focused on the text to understand better who John said Jesus is ( John 1:1). Therefore for all readers and  @Pages, in particular, have an advanced agreement and understanding of the following:

    • Agreed to the exchanges and established ground rules for them.
    •  @BroRando  agreed to the exchange on the substance of John 1:1.
    •  @BroRando  would avoid unsolicited JWs talking points.
    •  @BroRando avoids the standard at-the-door maneuverings of evasions, detractions, distortions, and outright demagogy. I speak from personal experience and study.
    •  @BroRando  acknowledges his proficiency or limited knowledge of Greek (like  @Bill_Coley ).
    • The two of would you affirm one another's points of agreement.
    • Occasionally, cite sources when they are appropriate and necessary.

    These and other factors you may want to consider. If you don't need them and have it all secured, more power to you. Regardless, I have taken the liberty to draft these guidelines for my fellow posters and silent readers in relating to one who is prone to be ambiguous and elusive. 

    If no one needs the above guidelines, view them as a harbinger of improving these forums. Until next time, keep reading, studying, and postingCM

  • BroRandoBroRando Posts: 496


    @Pages A single question to start:

    In this first clause, Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, I would like to ask what affect the use of the imperfect ἦν has on your understanding of Ἐν ἀρχῇ?

    Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος En archí ín o lógos rendered "In the beginning was the Word"

    The use of the imperfect ἦν (in) translated to (was) affects the first clause by changing the present tense of the sentence back to the past. This shows that the Word had a pre-existence.

Sign In or Register to comment.