Jesus is God - Every knee shall bow

[Wootah]

Isaiah 45
22 “Turn to me and be saved,
all you ends of the earth;
for I am God, and there is no other.
23 By myself I have sworn,
my mouth has uttered in all integrity
a word that will not be revoked:
Before me every knee will bow;
by me every tongue will swear.
24 They will say of me, ‘In the Lord alone
are deliverance and strength.’”
All who have raged against him
will come to him and be put to shame.
25 But all the descendants of Israel
will find deliverance in the Lord
and will make their boast in him.


Philippians 2:10-11
English Standard Version
10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Is every knee meant to bow to God or to Jesus or is this evidence Jesus is God?

[Capbook]

[Replying to Capbook in post #97]

Here are versions that say "the only-begotten SON" at John 1:18:

1. Interlinear Bible in Greek, Hebrew and English
2. King James Version
3. American Standard Bible/Translated out of the original tongues/1901
4. Jerusalem Bible
5. New Jerusalem Bible
6. James Moffatt Translation
7. Douay-Rheims
8. Young's Literal Translation
9. Tyndale's New Testament
10. JN Darby/ A New Translation
11. Emphatic Diaglott/Containing the Greek Text
12. New Catholic Confraternity Edition/1949-1950
13. Revised English Bible/Oxford, Cambridge/1989
14. New Testament in English/Msgr RA Knox
15. Revised Standard Version
16. Holy Bible/Sacred Heart Edition

There are more. I could go on. I think it suffices to say that the versions that put "God" where "Son" ought to be are not true to the meaning and have twisted the verse.

I know you missed to notice that the Westcott and Hort New Testament is officially titled "The New Testament in the Original Greek" and is a critical edition of the Greek New Testament published in 1881. It's a critical edition, meaning it was compiled by examining and comparing ancient Greek manuscripts to identify the most original wording of the New Testament. https://www.google.com/search?q=title+o ... e&ie=UTF-8

Westcott and Hort is not a translation, it is original Greek of the NT.
What you post are translations, mostly from outdated paraphrase.

The versions I have cited are "outdated paraphrase"? I don't see how you could call the Interlinear Bible outdated paraphrase. It goes to the original Greek and follows it word-for-word. So does the Emphatic Diaglott.

Yes, but they are translations.
Westcott and Hort is not a translation, I'll say again, it is original Greek of the NT.

I believe Emphatic Diaglott is not a neutral ground for support because it is your Church's Watch Tower Society that sold the Diaglott inexpensively (offering it free of charge from 1990). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emphatic_Diaglott

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Capbook in post #97]

Here are versions that say "the only-begotten SON" at John 1:18:

1. Interlinear Bible in Greek, Hebrew and English
2. King James Version
3. American Standard Bible/Translated out of the original tongues/1901
4. Jerusalem Bible
5. New Jerusalem Bible
6. James Moffatt Translation
7. Douay-Rheims
8. Young's Literal Translation
9. Tyndale's New Testament
10. JN Darby/ A New Translation
11. Emphatic Diaglott/Containing the Greek Text
12. New Catholic Confraternity Edition/1949-1950
13. Revised English Bible/Oxford, Cambridge/1989
14. New Testament in English/Msgr RA Knox
15. Revised Standard Version
16. Holy Bible/Sacred Heart Edition

There are more. I could go on. I think it suffices to say that the versions that put "God" where "Son" ought to be are not true to the meaning and have twisted the verse.

I know you missed to notice that the Westcott and Hort New Testament is officially titled "The New Testament in the Original Greek" and is a critical edition of the Greek New Testament published in 1881. It's a critical edition, meaning it was compiled by examining and comparing ancient Greek manuscripts to identify the most original wording of the New Testament. https://www.google.com/search?q=title+o ... e&ie=UTF-8

Westcott and Hort is not a translation, it is original Greek of the NT.
What you post are translations, mostly from outdated paraphrase.

The versions I have cited are "outdated paraphrase"? I don't see how you could call the Interlinear Bible outdated paraphrase. It goes to the original Greek and follows it word-for-word. So does the Emphatic Diaglott.

Yes, but they are translations.
Westcott and Hort is not a translation, I'll say again, it is original Greek of the NT.

Of course they offer atranslation. Westcott and Hort translated the Greek into English.

[Capbook]

[Replying to Capbook in post #97]

Here are versions that say "the only-begotten SON" at John 1:18:

1. Interlinear Bible in Greek, Hebrew and English
2. King James Version
3. American Standard Bible/Translated out of the original tongues/1901
4. Jerusalem Bible
5. New Jerusalem Bible
6. James Moffatt Translation
7. Douay-Rheims
8. Young's Literal Translation
9. Tyndale's New Testament
10. JN Darby/ A New Translation
11. Emphatic Diaglott/Containing the Greek Text
12. New Catholic Confraternity Edition/1949-1950
13. Revised English Bible/Oxford, Cambridge/1989
14. New Testament in English/Msgr RA Knox
15. Revised Standard Version
16. Holy Bible/Sacred Heart Edition

There are more. I could go on. I think it suffices to say that the versions that put "God" where "Son" ought to be are not true to the meaning and have twisted the verse.

I know you missed to notice that the Westcott and Hort New Testament is officially titled "The New Testament in the Original Greek" and is a critical edition of the Greek New Testament published in 1881. It's a critical edition, meaning it was compiled by examining and comparing ancient Greek manuscripts to identify the most original wording of the New Testament. https://www.google.com/search?q=title+o ... e&ie=UTF-8

Westcott and Hort is not a translation, it is original Greek of the NT.
What you post are translations, mostly from outdated paraphrase.

The versions I have cited are "outdated paraphrase"? I don't see how you could call the Interlinear Bible outdated paraphrase. It goes to the original Greek and follows it word-for-word. So does the Emphatic Diaglott.

Yes, but they are translations.
Westcott and Hort is not a translation, I'll say again, it is original Greek of the NT.

Of course they offer atranslation. Westcott and Hort translated the Greek into English.

No, Westcott and Hort is not a translation, it is original Greek of the New Testameant.
See how they rendered John 1:18 below;

(Greek NT Westcott and Hort+) θεον G2316 N-ASM  ουδεις G3762 A-NSM-N  εωρακεν G3708 V-RAI-3S-ATT  πωποτε G4455 ADV  μονογενης G3439 A-NSM  θεος G2316 N-NSM  ο G3588 T-NSM  ων G1510 V-PAP-NSM  εις G1519 PREP  τον G3588 T-ASM  κολπον G2859 N-ASM  του G3588 T-GSM  πατρος G3962 N-GSM  εκεινος G1565 D-NSM  εξηγησατο G1834 V-ADI-3S 

Also can you check the link below, it doesn't say about what you've said.
The 1864 Emphatic Diaglott translates John 1:18 as: "No one has ever seen God; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him". https://www.google.com/search?q=1864+em ... e&ie=UTF-8

[onewithhim]

I know you missed to notice that the Westcott and Hort New Testament is officially titled "The New Testament in the Original Greek" and is a critical edition of the Greek New Testament published in 1881. It's a critical edition, meaning it was compiled by examining and comparing ancient Greek manuscripts to identify the most original wording of the New Testament. https://www.google.com/search?q=title+o ... e&ie=UTF-8

Westcott and Hort is not a translation, it is original Greek of the NT.
What you post are translations, mostly from outdated paraphrase.

The versions I have cited are "outdated paraphrase"? I don't see how you could call the Interlinear Bible outdated paraphrase. It goes to the original Greek and follows it word-for-word. So does the Emphatic Diaglott.

Yes, but they are translations.
Westcott and Hort is not a translation, I'll say again, it is original Greek of the NT.

Of course they offer atranslation. Westcott and Hort translated the Greek into English.

No, Westcott and Hort is not a translation, it is original Greek of the New Testameant.
See how they rendered John 1:18 below;

(Greek NT Westcott and Hort+) θεον G2316 N-ASM  ουδεις G3762 A-NSM-N  εωρακεν G3708 V-RAI-3S-ATT  πωποτε G4455 ADV  μονογενης G3439 A-NSM  θεος G2316 N-NSM  ο G3588 T-NSM  ων G1510 V-PAP-NSM  εις G1519 PREP  τον G3588 T-ASM  κολπον G2859 N-ASM  του G3588 T-GSM  πατρος G3962 N-GSM  εκεινος G1565 D-NSM  εξηγησατο G1834 V-ADI-3S 

Also can you check the link below, it doesn't say about what you've said.
The 1864 Emphatic Diaglott translates John 1:18 as: "No one has ever seen God; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him". https://www.google.com/search?q=1864+em ... e&ie=UTF-8

Of course the Westcott and Hort rendering is a translation. Every English Bible known translates the Greek to the English. The Emphatic Diaglott and the Interlinear Bible translate from the Greek to the English, just like Westcott and Hort. Did you look up the meaning of "translation"? My dictionary defines it this way: "A written or spoken expression of the meaning of a word in another language." ALL Bible versions are translations from another language to English.

BTW, my version of the Emphatic Diaglott renders John 1:18 like this: "God no one has seen ever: the only begotten SON that being in the bosom of the Father, he has made known." A word-for-word translation from the Greek to English. (That is what Westcott and Hort claim to do also.)

[Difflugia]

Of course the Westcott and Hort rendering is a translation. Every English Bible known translates the Greek to the English.

Westcott and Hort isn't in English.

BTW, my version of the Emphatic Diaglott renders John 1:18 like this: "God no one has seen ever: the only begotten SON that being in the bosom of the Father, he has made known." A word-for-word translation from the Greek to English.

Then skip the English.

Westcott & Hort: θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε· μονογενῆς θεὸς ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐχηγήσατο.

Emphatic Diaglott: Θεον ουδεις ἑωρακε πωποτε· ὁ μονογενης υἱος, ὁ ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εχηγησατο.

Some Greek manuscripts read θεὸς and some read υἱός. It has nothing to do with translation.

[Capbook]

Of course the Westcott and Hort rendering is a translation. Every English Bible known translates the Greek to the English.

Westcott and Hort isn't in English.

BTW, my version of the Emphatic Diaglott renders John 1:18 like this: "God no one has seen ever: the only begotten SON that being in the bosom of the Father, he has made known." A word-for-word translation from the Greek to English.

Then skip the English.

Westcott & Hort: θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε· μονογενῆς θεὸς ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐχηγήσατο.

Emphatic Diaglott: Θεον ουδεις ἑωρακε πωποτε· ὁ μονογενης υἱος, ὁ ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εχηγησατο.

Some Greek manuscripts read θεὸς and some read υἱός. It has nothing to do with translation.

Only that the rendering of the Westcott and Hort's are supported by the oldest manuscripts that contained almost all the book of John, the papyrus 66, and papyrus 75. The rest are later manuscripts that varied from them.

[onewithhim]

Of course the Westcott and Hort rendering is a translation. Every English Bible known translates the Greek to the English.

Westcott and Hort isn't in English.

BTW, my version of the Emphatic Diaglott renders John 1:18 like this: "God no one has seen ever: the only begotten SON that being in the bosom of the Father, he has made known." A word-for-word translation from the Greek to English.

Then skip the English.

Westcott & Hort: θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε· μονογενῆς θεὸς ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐχηγήσατο.

Emphatic Diaglott: Θεον ουδεις ἑωρακε πωποτε· ὁ μονογενης υἱος, ὁ ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εχηγησατο.

Some Greek manuscripts read θεὸς and some read υἱός. It has nothing to do with translation.

Only that the rendering of the Westcott and Hort's are supported by the oldest manuscripts that contained almost all the book of John, the papyrus 66, and papyrus 75. The rest are later manuscripts that varied from them.

It's just interesting that sometimes you say that the oldest mss are the correct ones, and then at other times you say that the most recent mss are the correct ones.

[Capbook]

Of course the Westcott and Hort rendering is a translation. Every English Bible known translates the Greek to the English.

Westcott and Hort isn't in English.

BTW, my version of the Emphatic Diaglott renders John 1:18 like this: "God no one has seen ever: the only begotten SON that being in the bosom of the Father, he has made known." A word-for-word translation from the Greek to English.

Then skip the English.

Westcott & Hort: θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε· μονογενῆς θεὸς ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐχηγήσατο.

Emphatic Diaglott: Θεον ουδεις ἑωρακε πωποτε· ὁ μονογενης υἱος, ὁ ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εχηγησατο.

Some Greek manuscripts read θεὸς and some read υἱός. It has nothing to do with translation.

Only that the rendering of the Westcott and Hort's are supported by the oldest manuscripts that contained almost all the book of John, the papyrus 66, and papyrus 75. The rest are later manuscripts that varied from them.

It's just interesting that sometimes you say that the oldest mss are the correct ones, and then at other times you say that the most recent mss are the correct ones.

The oldest manuscripts as for me have less copyist mistakes.
While recent ones especially that falls in the hands of with the habits of adding words to the originals or changing the original Bible words would misled everyone.

[onewithhim]

Of course the Westcott and Hort rendering is a translation. Every English Bible known translates the Greek to the English.

Westcott and Hort isn't in English.

BTW, my version of the Emphatic Diaglott renders John 1:18 like this: "God no one has seen ever: the only begotten SON that being in the bosom of the Father, he has made known." A word-for-word translation from the Greek to English.

Then skip the English.

Westcott & Hort: θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε· μονογενῆς θεὸς ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐχηγήσατο.

Emphatic Diaglott: Θεον ουδεις ἑωρακε πωποτε· ὁ μονογενης υἱος, ὁ ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εχηγησατο.

Some Greek manuscripts read θεὸς and some read υἱός. It has nothing to do with translation.

Only that the rendering of the Westcott and Hort's are supported by the oldest manuscripts that contained almost all the book of John, the papyrus 66, and papyrus 75. The rest are later manuscripts that varied from them.

It's just interesting that sometimes you say that the oldest mss are the correct ones, and then at other times you say that the most recent mss are the correct ones.

The oldest manuscripts as for me have less copyist mistakes.
While recent ones especially that falls in the hands of with the habits of adding words to the originals or changing the original Bible words would misled everyone.

How do you know that the most recent mss have more copyist mistakes?

[Capbook]

Westcott and Hort isn't in English.


Then skip the English.

Westcott & Hort: θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε· μονογενῆς θεὸς ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐχηγήσατο.

Emphatic Diaglott: Θεον ουδεις ἑωρακε πωποτε· ὁ μονογενης υἱος, ὁ ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εχηγησατο.

Some Greek manuscripts read θεὸς and some read υἱός. It has nothing to do with translation.

Only that the rendering of the Westcott and Hort's are supported by the oldest manuscripts that contained almost all the book of John, the papyrus 66, and papyrus 75. The rest are later manuscripts that varied from them.

It's just interesting that sometimes you say that the oldest mss are the correct ones, and then at other times you say that the most recent mss are the correct ones.

The oldest manuscripts as for me have less copyist mistakes.
While recent ones especially that falls in the hands of with the habits of adding words to the originals or changing the original Bible words would misled everyone.

How do you know that the most recent mss have more copyist mistakes?

Do you believe what KJV 1John 5:7 says?