But the Jews had lost God's name
No they hadn't. The name is YHWH. They just don't speak it.
When Jesus and God are together in one verse, like
John 1:1, the definite article identifies the true God Jehovah from the other god-like figure.
No it doesn't. See below. Your explanation is wrong.
Look carefully....here it is in the Greek Interlinear....
"In en the beginning archē was eimi the ho Word logos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi with pros · ho God theos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi God theos."
You see that little word "ho"...it means "the" and it appears four times in that one verse....it is seen before the first mention of "theos" but not before the second. Two "mighty ones" are here in this one verse. The Word was "with" the God but he was not the God ("ho theos"). Pro-trinitarian bias means that they leave out the little word "ho" in the English translation to make it look like Jesus is God.
If there is no definite article to indicate the difference between God and his son, there was no way to tell which "god" was being spoken about.....so identifying Jehovah as "THE God" revealed who was actually God and who was the Word. It was the Word who became flesh...not "The God".
No, this is mistaken. Here's why. You have to know how Greek actually works. In Greek if the definite article is missing, it does not logically follow that an indefinite article should be inserted (there is no indefinite article in Greek). In John 1 there is no definite article in front of the word 'God' in the phrase, 'and the Word was God.' However, in this case, we can't just assume that the word 'God' is meant to be 'indefinite,' and therefore just insert an indefinite article in the English translation. Even though the Greek language does not have an indefinite article like we would think of in English, there is a way in Greek for the writer to indicate the indefinite idea. This is done in Greek by using the Greek indefinite pronoun "tis." Because the first use of the word 'God' in John 1:1 (‘the Word was with God’) clearly refers to the Only True God, John would more than likely have used a different Greek construction than he did if he had meant for this next phrase to refer to some ‘lesser’ god, and didn't want us to confuse this with the True God he had just mentioned. If John meant to avoid confusion, when making such a definitive statement, he could have done so by using this 'indefinite pronoun' ('tis') as an adjective. This would have made it clear that the Word was 'a certain god,' but not the one he was just referring to. Therefore, according to the Greek grammatical structure here, it seems clear that john is indicating that the Word is of the same essence and nature as the true God he first mentioned.
Additionally, the syntax reveals John's meaning, as well. The phrase in John 1:1 is an example of a predicate nominative preceding the subject in the sentence. (Sentences like this one that use a linking verb require the noun in the predicate part of the sentence to be in the nominative case. The subject of this clause is 'the Word' and the predicate is 'God.' In Greek, the word 'God' comes before 'Word.' According to normal Greek usage, the word 'God' should not have a definite article. Very often, emphasis is shown in Greek by placing a word out of its normal, expected word order. Special emphasis can be illustrated when the predicate comes first in the sentence. In other words, contrary to the thought that 'since there is no definite article used here it could mean some other god,' the fact that the word 'God' is used first in the sentence actually shows some emphasis that this Logos (Word) was in fact God in its nature. However, since it doesn't have the definite article, it indicates that the Word was not the same 'person' as the Father God, but has the same essence and nature.
Anti-Trinitarian bias means that the translators of the NWT have added the little word “a” to the translation in order to make it look like John was not equating Jesus with God.
Sorry... you have been misled...
