Some people believe that the Bible can't be changed because God is protecting it from change.
How can it be changed and also not changed?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
John 1:1
- Thread starter J2hapydna
- Start date
How can it be changed and also not changed?
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
Those words that are Written down on paper, man can tamper with to change them, but for the actual word that proceeds out of the mouth God himself can not be changed.
For say you write down something on paper, that can be tampered with to change.
But the actual words that proceeds out of your mouth can not be Changed.
It's one thing to change that which is written down on paper.
But the words that comes out your mouth or what is in your heart, can not be changed.
Therefore there two aspects of this to look at.
One is what is written down on paper in the bible is liable to be tampered with by man.
But the words that proceeds out of the mouth of God can not be changed.
Therefore, that which proceeds out of the mouth can not be changed. It will either condemn a person or set a person free.
Last edited:
I agree!
Bro Rando
Member
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) However, withholding the definite article which invokes the feminine sense as 'a god' in (John 1:1c) The use of feminine nouns emphasis the fact is that Word was created When? "In the Beginning was the Word" (John 1:1) The scripture is speaking about Words' godlike divinity. (ie) deity. All these are in the feminine sense.
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.
The word 'beginning; stresses these also in (John 1:1)
Strong's Concordance
arché: beginning, origin
Original Word: ἀρχή, ῆς, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: arché
Phonetic Spelling: (ar-khay')
Short Definition: ruler, beginning
Definition: (a) rule (kingly or magisterial), (b) plur: in a quasi-personal sense, almost: rulers, magistrates, (c) beginning.
HELPS Word-studies
746 arxḗ – properly, from the beginning (temporal sense), i.e. "the initial(starting) point"; (figuratively) what comes first and therefore is chief(foremost), i.e. has the priority because ahead of the rest ("preeminent").
Jesus is preeminent is he not?
"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;" (Colossians 1:15)
Strong's Concordance
ktisis: creation (the act or the product)
Original Word: κτίσις, εως, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: ktisis
Phonetic Spelling: (ktis'-is)
Short Definition: creation, creature, institution
Definition: (often of the founding of a city), (a) abstr: creation, (b) concr: creation, creature, institution; always of Divine work, (c) an institution, ordinance.
HELPS Word-studies
Cognate: 2937 ktísis – properly, creation (creature) which is founded from nothing (this is also the sense of this term from Homer on); creation out of nothing
Wisdom is spoken in the feminine sense as SHE. "Jehovah produced me as the beginning of his way,
The earliest of his achievements of long ago. From ancient times I was installed, From the start, from times earlier than the earth. When there were no deep waters, I was brought forth, When there were no springs overflowing with water." Proverbs 8:22-24)
If Jesus was brought forth or begotten, then at one time he was not. In a debate with a modalist, Tertullian stated that some say the rendering of (Genesis 1:1) should read "In the beginning God created for himself a Son."
However, the Bible states that "Christ is the Wisdom of God." (1 Corinthians 1:24)
Strong's Concordance
sophia: skill, wisdom
Original Word: σοφία, ας, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: sophia
Phonetic Spelling: (sof-ee'-ah)
Short Definition: wisdom
Definition: wisdom, insight, skill (human or divine), intelligence.
Look up the word Deity.
Strong's Concordance
theotés: deity
Original Word: θεότης, ητος, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: theotés
Phonetic Spelling: (theh-ot'-ace)
Short Definition: deity, Godhead
Definition: deity, Godhead.
Jehovah' Witnesses certainly do believe in the Deity of Christ. The Godhead is a divine arrangement of authority given to others. (Jesus, Paul, Moses) (ie... "Jesus approached and spoke to them, saying: “All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth." (Matthew 28:18)
Take Care.
Brother Rando
Not just the English translations, the French version I am familiar with has no article either.
Either the JW translation exists to serve a cultic agenda, or you accept their claims that the overwhelming majority of mainstream Christians since the first century have been duped by a conspiracy... Because reasons...
It's up to you.
Bro Rando
Member
Other variations of rendering John 1:1 also exist:
- 1808: "and the Word was a god" – Thomas Belsham The New Testament, in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text, London.
- 1822: "and the Word was a god" – The New Testament in Greek and English (A. Kneeland, 1822.)
- 1829: "and the Word was a god" – The Monotessaron; or, The Gospel History According to the Four Evangelists (J. S. Thompson, 1829)
- 1863: "and the Word was a god" – A Literal Translation of the New Testament (Herman Heinfetter [Pseudonym of Frederick Parker], 1863)
- 1864: "and a god was the Word" – The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson, New York and London (left hand column interlinear reading)
- 1867: "In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God" – The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible
- 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" – The Bible: An American Translation, by John M. P. Smith and 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
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
Why do you suppose all those other Bible's came about and by who and for what reason ?
So your point being?
That to which you given in all those books, doesn't change anything.
Let's take a look at the word ( A ) that the meaning of the word ( A ) is used when referring to someone or something.
Is used to indicate membership of a class of people or thing.
Like --he is a lawyer.
Therefore using the word ( A ) in the sentence --
"And the word was a God" Signifying that there is only one God.
Therefore Those books doesn't change the fact, That Christ Jesus is God in the flesh.
So what is your point being?
Last edited:
Grandliseur
Well-Known Member
The problem isn't that difficult in my opinion. Just like the NWT has colored some of its verses, flavored to fit their dogma, so did the Trinitarians.
I made a page about this - trying to do the right thing regarding the Greek, that is, being consistent. If you should like to have a look, please check the link and let me know if I am right: I haven't had the chance to update the page in a long time due to personal problems. So while this page should be fine, others might be in need of updating:
Link: >Truth Seeker - Trinity-John 1:1<
Last edited:
ἐν ἀρχῇ . . .ἦν .ὁ . λόγος
in beginning was the word
καὶ ὁ . λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν
and the word was with the god
καὶ θεὸς ἦν .ὁ .λόγος
and god was the word
Bro Rando
Member
The scriptures don't say that Christ Jesus is God in the flesh. Man-made doctrines do. God is a title assigned to those who are authorized to represent God. "And Jehovah said to Moses, See, I have made thee God to Pharaoh; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet." (Exodus 7:1 Darby)
Are you now going to say Moses is God? I think not......
The Word became flesh, not GOD. "So the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only-begotten son from a father; and he was full of divine favor and truth " (John 1:14)
"For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, so that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)
God is Eternal not begotten...
Take Care.
Brother Rando
The logos is common but everyone seems to have their own private understanding"
How does what you have written remotely align with the above statement?
The logos is common but everyone seems to have their own private understanding"
How does what you have said remotely align with the quote? I don't see it.
The logos is common but everyone seems to have their own private understanding"
How does what you have said remotely align with the quote? I don't see it I especially don't see it in your particular post.
What is the above statement?
It might have been written thus:
God is for the word and the word is for God.
You might be able to imagine that it is possible for someone to be for something, but that something that they believe they are for does not reciprocate.
I think that John 1:1 is about reciprocation.
The logos is common but everyone seems to have their own private understanding"
If you don't know who wrote the above quote you have zero clue to what the text is saying.
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
It's goes like this, if people really understands the bible, they will be the first to notice a word Changed.
But for those who are not skilled in the bible, will not detect a word Changed.
That's what the JWs did in John 1:1
They added the ( A) meaning any God
Look if I was to ask you for (A) pencil, that would mean any pencil would do.
But I ask you for (the) pencil, I'm asking for a Pacific pencil and not just any pencil.
Therefore by JWs adding the letter (A) this changes the whole context of what
John 1:1 is actually saying.
Therefore saying, The word was A God. Could be any Good would do.
But to have it say, The word was God, thereby pointing to a Pacific God and not any Good, has the JWs would have it.
Bro Rando
Member
The Logos is the Word, and that Word is God's Chief Messenger whom mediates between God and men. "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, a man, Christ Jesus," (1 Timothy 2:6)
Jesus told the Samaritan woman that, "God is a Spirit, and those worshipping him must worship with spirit and truth." (John 4:24) Jesus Christ also stated very clearly that, "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)
If you don't believe Jesus Christ whom bore witness about his Father, then what I say is mute. That is why I am quoting the Word of God. "No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him, and I will resurrect him on the last day." (John 6:44)
Take Care.
Brother Rando
I think the Jehovah's Witnesses teach that Jesus is the mediator between God and some men only.
Bro Rando
Member
Yes, those who rule as kings and priests for a thousand years during his Millennial Reign. "Happy and holy is anyone having part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no authority, but they will be priests of God and of the Christ, and they will rule as kings with him for the 1,000 years." (Rev 20:6)
"The one that conquers—I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he will by no means go out [from it] anymore, and I will write upon him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem which descends out of heaven from my God, and that new name of mine." (Rev 3:12)
Is Jesus God?
In what language were the Christian scriptures written? Koine Greek....the common language of the day.
In Greek, there is no indefinite article ("a" or "an") so wherever you see an indefinite article in the English translation of the Bible, it was inserted by the translators in order to read correctly in English.
In Greek however there is a definite article ("the") so in John 1:1 we see the use of the definite article in identifying "the God" whereas the definite article is missing in identifying the Logos as "the God" but rather as a godlike one...a divinely authorized person.
God himself identified Israelite judges as "gods" because of their divine authority. Moses likewise was said to be "God" to Pharaoh.....it didn't mean that they were "the God" whose personal name would have clarified all those scriptures where it is hard to tell who is being spoken about.
Bible translations have a lot to answer for in misleading people about the nature of God and his relationship to his only begotten son. Nowhere in all of scripture did Jesus ever claim to be God or to even have any sort of equality with him. He directed all glory to his Father who was also his God.
Remember too that to Greeks, who had multiple gods, there was no term that identified their gods individually except their name. The Jews had long since stopped using the divine name, (Yahweh, Jehovah) so the ambiguous title "LORD" came to be substituted and the word "God" in Greek simply meant a divine might one.
Confusion over the identity of the one whose title was "Lord" soon merged the Lord Jesus Christ with the Lord Jehovah.
In Exodus 3:15 in the KJV it is rendered...."And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, the Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations."
The same scripture in the ASV reads...."And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations."
Which rendering is more accurate? Obviously it was God's name that was the important point here....the KJV eliminated the divine name and substituted a title. The ASV did not, but stayed true to the text where the divine name was clearly there.
It makes you wonder why the KJV used the divine name at Psalm 83:18 but not at Exodus 3:15? Who decided where the divine name should and should not be used? The NWT solved that problem by putting God's name back in all the scriptures where it belongs.