John 1:1

[Unveiled Artist]

@Unveiled Artist ,

Everything you just now posted I agree with. But what I was taking issue, was concerning...


"Divine" and "God" are not interchangeable words..."divine" and "of God", or "like God", are.

Blame the language on the trinitarians. They forget the prepositions. I think you guys say the samething. I know the priest told me jesus isnt his father, he is god.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

God does not have a father or mother--Jesus does.

Jesus is called god because they share the same purpose. It expresses the relationship between father and his incarnated word which he calls (by relations in role not birth) his son. Like our four fathers type of thing. The US doesnt actually have four fathers.

The holy spirit is jesus' spirit to which brought people to god "through" jesus at pentacoast.

Trinity means relationship between three things. Duality two. Singularity one. Its the relations between father, human son, human spirit as intermediary to god. The divinity (perfection; adjective) is for all three. Their nature (creator, human, spirit) are different. Trinity: they work together.

One of my priest told me jesus isnt the father, he's god. Unless he means two gods, either you are going off protestant views or not reading the catholic bible and catechism to know what the church actually teaches despites its historical and human political slipups.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Therefore you have Jesus claiming to be God the Father.

Oh, my goodness!!

So, all those times Jesus was praying, "my Father" he was praying to...himself? At John 14:28, where Jesus said "the Father is greater than I am", he was saying that he was greater than.... himself? When Jesus said (John 8:28), "the Father taught me"..... he had really taught....himself? When Jesus prayed, "let not my will, but yours, take place"....what, is he schizophrenic? When Jesus said to Martha after his resurrection, "I an ascending to my God and your God, to my Father and your Father", how could he 'ascend' to the Father, if he was the Father?

At Revelation 3:12, 4 times Jesus said he had a God...who is it?

You make God, unrecognizable! No wonder so many make fun of Christianity.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Acclaimed Bible scholar and Roman Catholic priest John L. McKenzie, S.J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: “Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated ‘the word was with the God [= the Father], and the word was a divine being.’”—(Brackets are his. Published with nihil obstat and imprimatur.) (New York, 1965), p. 317. (Bold type is mine.)

Now, why would a Trinitarian not accept this passage as evidence promoting Jesus as God?

Because of the context, and Koine Greek grammar. (Koine Greek was the language the Apostle John wrote this.)


Let’s look at the context...John 1:18 says: “No one has ever seen God.” John 1:14 clearly says that “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us . . . we have beheld his glory.” Also, vss.1 & 2 say that in the beginning he was “with God.” Can one be with someone and at the same time be that person? Would John really write something so confusing and ambiguous, if he meant to convey that Jesus was God?

In consideration of this (and the grammar issues detailed below),

The New Testament, in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text, London, 1808, renders John 1:1b, ““and the word was a god””;

The Emphatic Diaglott (J21, interlinear reading), by Benjamin Wilson, New York and London, 1864: ““and a god was the Word””;

The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed, Chicago, 1935: ““and the Word was divine””;

New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, Brooklyn, 1950: ““and the Word was a god””;

Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz, Göttingen, Germany, 1975: ““and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word””;

Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider, Berlin,
1978: ““and godlike sort was the Logos””;

Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Jürgen Becker, Würzburg, Germany, 1979: ““and a god was the Logos””;

and 2001translation.com renders it, “the Word was a powerful one“.

At John 17:3, Jesus addresses his Father as “the only true God”; so, Jesus as “a god” merely reflects his Father’s divine qualities.—Hebrews 1:3.

Is the rendering “a god” consistent with the rules of Greek grammar? Yes. In his article “Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns: Mark 15:39 and John 1:1,” Philip B. Harner said that such clauses as the one in John 1:1, “with an anarthrous predicate preceding the verb, are primarily qualitative in meaning. They indicate that the logos has the nature of theos.” He suggests: “Perhaps the clause could be translated, ‘the Word had the same nature as God.’” (Journal of Biblical Literature, 1973, pp. 85, 87) Thus, in this text, the fact that the word the·osʹ in its second occurrence is without the definite article (ho) and is placed before the verb in the sentence in Greek is significant. Interestingly, translators that insist on rendering John 1:1, “The Word was God,” do not hesitate to use the indefinite article (a, an) in their rendering of other passages where a singular anarthrous predicate noun occurs before the verb. Thus at John 6:70, The Jerusalem Bible and King James both refer to Judas Iscariot as “a devil,” and at John 9:17 they describe Jesus as “a prophet.”


— Excerpt from “Reasoning on the Scriptures”; Trinity — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

I think its language issues, honestly.

I believe in the father, thevson, and the holy spirit. (Rather than -as- and -is-)

No one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God."7 Now God's Spirit, who reveals God, makes known to us Christ, his Word, his living Utterance, but the Spirit does not speak of himself. CCC

Jesus is Christ, "anointed," because the Spirit is his anointing, and everything that occurs from the Incarnation on derives from this fullness.11 When Christ is finally glorified,12 he can in turn send the Spirit from his place with the Father to those who believe in him: he communicates to them his glory,13 that is, the Holy Spirit who glorifies him.14 From that time on, this joint mission will be manifested in the children adopted by the Father in the Body of his Son: the mission of the Spirit of adoption is to unite them to Christ and make them live in him

-

Its a language problem. Above, the Church is speaking of the father and son as seperate. It combines the two by gods spirit. Meaning the father blessed his son to where the son took on the mission of his father to teach his father's word of salvation. (In their joint mission, the Son and the Holy Spirit are distinct but inseparable.) Jesus didnt bless himself. He didnt pray to himself. Thats explicit in The Church, their CC, and their bible.

They believe that because jesus is god's incarnated message, when they worship jesus, they worship god. Trinity is about the relationship between three regardless the language and who catholics worship.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Oh, my goodness!!

So, all those times Jesus was praying, "my Father" he was praying to...himself? At John 14:28, where Jesus said "the Father is greater than I am", he was saying that he was greater than.... himself? When Jesus said (John 8:28), "the Father taught me"..... he had really taught....himself? When Jesus prayed, "let not my will, but yours, take place"....what, is he schizophrenic? When Jesus said to Martha after his resurrection, "I an ascending to my God and your God, to my Father and your Father", how could he 'ascend' to the Father, if he was the Father?

At Revelation 3:12, 4 times Jesus said he had a God...who is it?

You make God, unrecognizable! No wonder so many make fun of Christianity.

Seeing you have no idea as to why Jesus was praying.
Had you any idea, That Jesus was sitting forth the example to follow, As to how to pray to God.
If you were a Christian you would know that Jesus is the example for Christians to follow.
Therefore Jesus was in the giving the example for Christians to follow in praying to God.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

If you were a Christian....

Here we go!
Are Christians to love their brother, or kill them? In times of secular conflict, what reputation does Christendom have, i.e., what example have they set, in this regard?
Jesus said, "You will know them, by their fruits"!
Jesus further said, "All will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves."

How many Jesus-is-God believers have killed other Jesus-is-God believers during wars?

Since you **need** God's blessing to accurately understand the Scriptures......

Why would anyone think the 'Jesus-is-God' crowd have accurate knowledge, when they can't even live by His laws?!



Titus 1:16

 

[Faithofchristian]

Here we go!
Are Christians to love their brother, or kill them? In times of secular conflict, what reputation does Christendom have, i.e., what example have they set, in this regard?
Jesus said, "You will know them, by their fruits"!
Jesus further said, "All will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves."

How many Jesus-is-God believers have killed other Jesus-is-God believers during wars?

Since you **need** God's blessing to accurately understand the Scriptures......

Why would anyone think the 'Jesus-is-God' crowd have accurate knowledge, when they can't even live by His laws?!



Titus 1:16

That all depends, Which Christians your talking about, Have you any idea which Christians are which.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

That all depends, Which Christians your talking about, Have you any idea which Christians are which.

Oh, I believe Christianity is the accurate religion. Jesus' teachings are right on. Those teachings, though, are not followed (as per example given above). Jesus always directed attention to His Father, never to himself.

You see, God didn't change...only the way to worship Him did, i.e., through faith in Jesus' sacrifice. That entails obedience, too... over and above Caesar's Law (when they clash), as seen in Acts of the Apostles 5:29.

Since we *need* God's spirit to understand His Scriptures, if we're not listening to His commands through His Son, why would we expect to have any understanding of it?

Or, if we belong to a religious organization that fails to follow Christ's Law of Love (John 15:12) especially under difficult circumstances, as when a conflict between nations arise...we shouldn't expect their teachings to be truth.

Fighting and killing are not 'little' issues.

1 John 3:10-15.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

That all depends, Which Christians your talking about, Have you any idea which Christians are which.

Oh, I believe Christianity is the accurate religion. Jesus' teachings are right on. Those teachings, though, are not followed (as per example given above). Jesus always directed attention to His Father, never to himself.

You see, God didn't change...only the way to worship Him did, i.e., through faith in Jesus' sacrifice. That entails obedience, too... over and above Caesar's Law (when they clash), as seen in Acts of the Apostles 5:29.

Since we *need* God's spirit to understand His Scriptures, if we're not listening to His commands through His Son, why would we expect to have any understanding of it?

Or, if we belong to a religious organization that fails to follow Christ's Law of Love (John 15:12) especially under difficult circumstances, as when a conflict between nations arise...we shouldn't expect their teachings to be truth.

Fighting and killing are not 'little' issues.

1 John 3:10-15.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

That all depends, Which Christians your talking about, Have you any idea which Christians are which.

Oh, I believe Christianity is the accurate religion. Jesus' teachings are right on. Those teachings, though, are not followed (as per example given above). Jesus always directed attention to His Father, never to himself.

You see, God didn't change...only the way to worship Him did, i.e., through faith in Jesus' sacrifice. That entails obedience, too... over and above Caesar's Law (when they clash), as seen in Acts of the Apostles 5:29.

Since we *need* God's spirit to understand His Scriptures, if we're not listening to His commands through His Son, why would we expect to have any understanding of it?

Or, if we belong to a religious organization that fails to follow Christ's Law of Love (John 15:12) especially under difficult circumstances, as when a conflict between nations arise...we shouldn't expect their teachings to be truth.

Fighting and killing are not 'little' issues.

1 John 3:10-15.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Oh, I believe Christianity is the accurate religion. Jesus' teachings are right on. Those teachings, though, are not followed (as per example given above). Jesus always directed attention to His Father, never to himself.

You see, God didn't change...only the way to worship Him did, i.e., through faith in Jesus' sacrifice. That entails obedience, too... over and above Caesar's Law (when they clash), as seen in Acts of the Apostles 5:29.

Since we *need* God's spirit to understand His Scriptures, if we're not listening to His commands through His Son, why would we expect to have any understanding of it?

Or, if we belong to a religious organization that fails to follow Christ's Law of Love (John 15:12) especially under difficult circumstances, as when a conflict between nations arise...we shouldn't expect their teachings to be truth.

Fighting and killing are not 'little' issues.

1 John 3:10-15.

Upon you saying ( you believe Christianity is the accurate religion ) speaks for itself self, that you haven't a clue or idea that there are two groups of Christians in the world. and you have no idea or clue as to which is which.

Had you any idea that Jesus is God in the flesh, unto to which you haven't any idea or clue about.

 

[kjw47]

Jesus is called god because they share the same purpose. It expresses the relationship between father and his incarnated word which he calls (by relations in role not birth) his son. Like our four fathers type of thing. The US doesnt actually have four fathers.

The holy spirit is jesus' spirit to which brought people to god "through" jesus at pentacoast.

Trinity means relationship between three things. Duality two. Singularity one. Its the relations between father, human son, human spirit as intermediary to god. The divinity (perfection; adjective) is for all three. Their nature (creator, human, spirit) are different. Trinity: they work together.

One of my priest told me jesus isnt the father, he's god. Unless he means two gods, either you are going off protestant views or not reading the catholic bible and catechism to know what the church actually teaches despites its historical and human political slipups.

Every true follower on earth lives now to do Jesus Fathers will-Matt 7:21- They disowned themselves to follow Jesus( Matt 16:24) it does not make them God.
Many ran from Catholicism once they read the bible for themselves and saw how far removed they were from God--yet not one of them fixed it.

 

[metis]

Many ran from Catholicism once they read the bible for themselves and saw how far removed they were from God--yet not one of them fixed it.

And many came back to Catholicism when they came to realize that the anti-Catholic lies that they were taught are just that-- lies; especially since it makes a mockery of Jesus who said that he would "guide the church until the end of time"*. And yet the JW leaders insist that the Church fell into apostasy, so when are they going to believe in what Jesus actually said, kjw?


*Matthew 16 [18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.
[19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

and

Matthew 28 [19] Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
[20] teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age."

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Every true follower on earth lives now to do Jesus Fathers will-Matt 7:21- They disowned themselves to follow Jesus( Matt 16:24) it does not make them God.
Many ran from Catholicism once they read the bible for themselves and saw how far removed they were from God--yet not one of them fixed it.

Scripture brought me to catholicism. I knew god more through baptism, repentence, communion, and study than any other practice at other churches.

Can you address the post?

 

[Shiranui117]

Thank you all very much. I learned a lot. It seems that this verse can be read both ways. If the reader already believes in the Trinity then God otherwise a god or divine or godly.

I also read on the Internet that the Coptic Bible has the indefinite article. So it would seem the Egyptians certainly didn’t think Logos was God

Except this isn't correct. To argue that the Jehovah's Witnesses are correct in this point is to argue that the first Christians were polytheists, believing in the existence of many gods. This is patently false. The indefinite article in Coptic can be used to convey the idea that Object A has the qualities of Object B. In this case, the Word had the qualities of God. This especially holds true when you consider that the Council of Nicea and its creed were spearheaded by St. Athanasius of Alexandria, an Egyptian born and raised. Also, quite possibly the oldest prayer to Mary, which begins "We fly to your patronage, O Virgin Birthgiver of God..." was written in Coptic around 250 AD, for which we have the papyrus. So quite clearly, the Copts didn't believe that Jesus was "a God", like the Jehovah's Witnesses do, whatever that's supposed to mean. They believe, and continue to believe, that Jesus shares the Nature and Divinity of the Father.
Sources:
http://www.equip.org/article/jehovahs-witnesses-john-11-new-evidence-advances-discussion/
Sub tuum praesidium - Wikipedia

 

[OtherSheep]

Most English Bibles (KJV, NIV etc) say “the Word was God” in John 1:1. However the JW Bible (NWT) says “the Word was a god”. Which is right?

And the Word became flesh, and did tabernacle among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of an only begotten of a father, full of grace and truth. (YLT)

Hear, O Israel, The Lord our God is one Lord (Deut.6, LXX)

 

[Hockeycowboy]

To argue that the Jehovah's Witnesses are correct in this point is to argue that the first Christians were polytheists, believing in the existence of many gods. This is patently false.

At 1 Corinthians 8:5-6, Paul recognized there were “many gods”, but that didn’t mean he - or other Christians - worshipped them.

Scholar Philip B. Harner discusses the grammar of John 1:1, and concludes that John meant the Word had a god-like quality. In his article “Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns: Mark 15:39 and John 1:1,” he said that such clauses as the one in John 1:1, “with an anarthrous predicate preceding the verb, are primarily qualitative in meaning. They indicate that the logos has the nature of theos.” He suggests: “Perhaps the clause could be translated, ‘the Word had the same nature as God.’” (Journal of Biblical Literature, 1973, pp. 85, 87)

 

[Windwalker]

Scholar Philip B. Harner discusses the grammar of John 1:1, and concludes that John meant the Word had a god-like quality. In his article “Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns: Mark 15:39 and John 1:1,” he said that such clauses as the one in John 1:1, “with an anarthrous predicate preceding the verb, are primarily qualitative in meaning. They indicate that the logos has the nature of theos.” He suggests: “Perhaps the clause could be translated, ‘the Word had the same nature as God.’” (Journal of Biblical Literature, 1973, pp. 85, 87)

This is fascinating because this supports the Trinitarian view that Jesus was Divine. Yes, the anarthrous form denotes the nature (not "god-like quality", which is not what is suggested). The Logos is Divinity. "'kai theos en o logos". It can never be translated "a god". It means Divinity, or the Nature of God. "The Logos is Divine". Not "divine-like quality".

 

[Hockeycowboy]

This is fascinating because this supports the Trinitarian view that Jesus was Divine. Yes, the anarthrous form denotes the nature (not "god-like quality", which is not what is suggested). The Logos is Divinity. "'kai theos en o logos". It can never be translated "a god". It means Divinity, or the Nature of God. "The Logos is Divine". Not "divine-like quality".

Let me ask you...what’s the definition of divine?

It doesn’t mean being God.

 

[cataway]

Seeing you have no idea as to why Jesus was praying.
Had you any idea, That Jesus was sitting forth the example to follow, As to how to pray to God.
If you were a Christian you would know that Jesus is the example for Christians to follow.
Therefore Jesus was in the giving the example for Christians to follow in praying to God.

you are telling us this trinity god is a deceiver