John 1:1, the word was "a god."

[onewithhim]

Does anyone here have the list of Bible versions that say of John 1:1c "the word was a god"? I know there are several.

[Capbook]

Maybe you can re-read post #53. It seems that you aren't getting the sense of what Tygger is saying. Capital letters don't necessarily mean what is intended. The capital "G" of "the Logos was God" is not really there; just the mental inclination of a man. It is actually a small "g" without the article. It is necessarily rendered as "a god."

You don't get Acts 28:6. It is being referred to to show that Paul was referred to as "God," and yet no one would have been calling Paul "God." So that verse includes "He is a God," but meaning "He is a god," adhering strictly to the rules of translation from Greek to English, so why wouldn't that be the same rendering as in John 1:1?

It seems you don't accurately read Tygger's post, I bolded and colored blue above, that is what really written in the original 1864 Emphatic Diaglott of Benjamin Wilson in PDF form. About Tygger's opinion about "GOD or God" differences, I think he must support it with evidence not just his own interpretation. And I am confused, JWs interpret Jesus as "a god" not "God" but when "God" appears, argue that it has supposed to be "GOD". Sound confusing. It's obvious that Tygger had read the original and you have not, you can visit it, ask him the link.

I am not confused. Tygger was trying to show you that the words in question should be "a god," NOT "God." You have failed to understand what Tygger was saying. Think about it some more before you continue to make erroneous judgments.

Tygger explains what was written in the left-page, and he quote the right-page the way Benjamin Wilson the author understand it and translate to, "and the LOGOS was God." Did you see what I colored blue above?

That is not what Tygger was trying to say. Read over again what he wrote. All of it, to the end.

What Tygger trying to say is his opinion, what I posted is the evidence. You can see it by yourself. Request Tygger for the link.

[tygger2]

[Replying to Capbook in post #61]

.....................................................
P. 8 in my copy of the Emphatic Diaglott:

"the Signs of Emphasis are incorporated with the words in such a manner, that the latter cannot be stated without conveying at the same time to the intelligent mind an idea of the very intonation with which the sentence was spoken when it was written down. This peculiarity of the Greek language cannot be properly expressed in English except by the use of typographical signs ; such as, Initial Capital letters, italics, small capitals, and CAPITALS." - https://archive.org/details/emphaticdia ... 5/mode/2up

This NT Greek emphasis is practically worthless for English readers and imparts no significant meaning about the word itself. You will probably never find another Bible which bothers with it.

[tygger2]

[Replying to tygger2 in post #62]

OK, here it is again:
Onewithhim has probably seen my many attempts to get someone, anyone, to read my personal study of John's intended meaning of John 1:1c by examining all his uses of the same grammar (syntax) in all of his writings. Yes, it is lengthy (but you should see the original!), but it actually proves what John himself meant.

One would think that someone would do his best to understand (and prove/disprove) what is factually there. It is not from a JW article, but is my own exhaustive study. In fact I was not yet a JW when I finally finished it. It did help convince me to continue my studies with them.

This is a small part of my condensed version (seven lessons for John 1:1c) Lesson 4 [D]:
These are all the places where John uses the same grammatical construction as he did at John 1:1c.
H 1. John 4:9 (a) - indefinite (“a Jew”) - all translations
H,W 2. John 4:19 - indefinite (“a prophet”) - all
H,W 3. John 6:70 - indefinite (“a devil”/“a slanderer”) - all
H,W 4. John 8:44 - indefinite (“a murderer”/“a manslayer”) - all
H,W 5. John 8:48 - indefinite (“a Samaritan”) - all
H,W 6. John 9:24 - indefinite (“a sinner”) - all
H,W 7. John 10:1 - indefinite (“a thief and a plunderer”) - all
H,W 8. John 10:33 - indefinite (“a man”) - all
H,W 9. John 18:35 - indefinite (“a Jew”) - all
H,W 10. John 18:37 (a) - indefinite (“a king”) - all
[H,W 11. John 18:37 (b) - indefinite (“a king”) - in Received Text and in 1991 Byzantine Text]
H,W 12. Jn 8:44 (b) - indefinite (“a liar”) - all
H,W 13. Jn 9:8 (a) - indefinite (“a beggar”) - all
H,W 14. Jn 9:17 - indefinite (“a prophet”) - all
H,W 15. Jn 9:25 - indefinite (“a sinner”) - all
H,W 16. Jn 10:13 - indefinite (“a hireling/hired hand”) - all
H,W 17. Jn 12:6 - indefinite (“a thief”) - all
18. 1 Jn 4:20 - indefinite (“a liar”) - all
And, possibly,
H,W 19. 1 John 2:4 - liar (he) is.

These are all indefinite nouns (not definite, not “qualitative”). All trinitarian Bible translations I have examined render them as indefinite! (a man; a prophet; etc.)

[tygger2]

[Replying to tygger2 in post #63]

C.
John 1:1 in NT Greek (cont.):

But, you may ask, Isn’t there a significance to the reversed word order in the Greek (‘god was the word’) which is, in English, ‘the word was god.’?

If you will examine a good NT interlinear, you will find that word order is basically meaningless.

NT Greek authorities, Dr. Alfred Marshall and Prof. J. Gresham Machen tell us in their NT Greek primers that, unlike English, NT Greek does not use word order to convey meanings but instead uses the individual endings on each word (inflections).

“The English translation must be determined by observing the [Greek word] endings, not by observing the [word] order.” - New Testament Greek for Beginners, Machen, p. 27. (cf. New Testament Greek Primer, Marshall, pp. 7, 22 and A. T. Robertson, Grammar, p. 417.)

And in a later example illustrating predicate nouns Prof. Machen gave this example: “ho apostolos anthropos estin [word for word translation: ‘the apostle man is’],” and he translated that sentence (which has an anarthrous predicate count noun preceding the verb as in John 1:1c) as “the apostle is a man.” - p. 50, New Testament Greek For Beginners, The Macmillan Company, 1951. Notice the addition of the English indefinite article (‘a’).

And In Exercise 8 (p.44) of the Rev. Dr. Alfred Marshall’s New Testament Greek Primer, the noted trinitarian scholar asks us to translate phoneus esti into English. (Notice that the predicate noun [phoneus, ‘murderer’] precedes the verb [esti, ‘he is’].) The answer is given on p. 153 where Dr. Marshall translates it as “He is a murderer.” – Zondervan Publishing House, 1962.

And Prof. N. Clayton Croy on p. 35 of his A Primer of Biblical Greek translates prophetes estin ho anthropos (literally, “prophet is the man”) as “The man is a prophet.” - Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1999. (Emphasis, as usual, is mine.)

In Learn New Testament Greek by John H. Dobson we find on p. 64 two interesting Greek clauses and their translations by Dobson: the clauses are: (1) prophetes estin and (2) prophetes ēn. In both of these the predicate noun (prophetes) comes before the verb (‘he is’ and ‘he was’).

Here is how Dobson has translated these two clauses: “He is a prophet.” And “He was a prophet.” – Baker Book House, 1989.

Also see p. 148, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, where trinitarians Dana and Mantey translate an example they admit is parallel to John 1:1c as “And the place was a market,” The Macmillan Company.

And noted trinitarian NT scholar, A.T. Robertson, when analyzing John 18:37b where the predicate noun “king” comes before the verb [“you say that king am I”], prefers this translation: “Yes, because I am a king.” - p. 294, Vol. 5, Word Pictures in the New Testament.

But, since the actual grammar of John (and all the other Gospel writers) shows John 1:1c to be properly translated as “and the Word was a god,” some trinitarians attempted to make this perfectly ordinary NT Greek word order into something else. In 1933, Colwell proposed that the word order could make the definite article understood! This way the understood ho (‘the’) could 'cause' Jn 1:1c to say “and the word was [the] god.” And, as we have already found, ho theos (‘the god’) always indicates “God” in English translation for John’s writing.

This necessity by some trinitarians for a new ‘rule’ is a further admission that theos by itself doesn’t mean “God” in the Gospel of John.

Another new ‘rule’ concerning the word order of John 1:1c has been proposed to make the Word of the same essence as God. These ‘Qualitative’ rules are like Colwell’s rule above except they don’t allow for an understood article (ho) before theos. They say that the word order makes theos ‘qualitative.’

The same method of examining all proper examples that are parallel to John 1:1c in John proves both relatively modern inventions to be wrong.

http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... 11c-a.html

[Capbook]

[Replying to Capbook in post #61]

.....................................................
P. 8 in my copy of the Emphatic Diaglott:

"the Signs of Emphasis are incorporated with the words in such a manner, that the latter cannot be stated without conveying at the same time to the intelligent mind an idea of the very intonation with which the sentence was spoken when it was written down. This peculiarity of the Greek language cannot be properly expressed in English except by the use of typographical signs ; such as, Initial Capital letters, italics, small capitals, and CAPITALS." - https://archive.org/details/emphaticdia ... 5/mode/2up

This NT Greek emphasis is practically worthless for English readers and imparts no significant meaning about the word itself. You will probably never find another Bible which bothers with it.

Would that mean that it is wrong for JWs to quote Emphatic Diaglott to support their point?

The Emphatic Diaglott is a specific translation and study tool that features the Greek New Testament text, based on Griesbach's recension, alongside an interlineary translation and an emphatic version. The Diaglott aims to present the original Greek text and its English translation side-by-side, allowing readers to compare the two and appreciate the nuances of the Greek language.

Griesbach's recension refers to his specific choice of textual readings from various Greek New Testament manuscripts. The Emphatic Diaglott utilizes Griesbach's preferred readings as the basis for its translation.https://www.google.com/search?q=dr+j+y+ ... s-wiz-serp

[Capbook]

[Replying to tygger2 in post #63]

C.
John 1:1 in NT Greek (cont.):

But, you may ask, Isn’t there a significance to the reversed word order in the Greek (‘god was the word’) which is, in English, ‘the word was god.’?

If you will examine a good NT interlinear, you will find that word order is basically meaningless.

NT Greek authorities, Dr. Alfred Marshall and Prof. J. Gresham Machen tell us in their NT Greek primers that, unlike English, NT Greek does not use word order to convey meanings but instead uses the individual endings on each word (inflections).

“The English translation must be determined by observing the [Greek word] endings, not by observing the [word] order.” - New Testament Greek for Beginners, Machen, p. 27. (cf. New Testament Greek Primer, Marshall, pp. 7, 22 and A. T. Robertson, Grammar, p. 417.)

And in a later example illustrating predicate nouns Prof. Machen gave this example: “ho apostolos anthropos estin [word for word translation: ‘the apostle man is’],” and he translated that sentence (which has an anarthrous predicate count noun preceding the verb as in John 1:1c) as “the apostle is a man.” - p. 50, New Testament Greek For Beginners, The Macmillan Company, 1951. Notice the addition of the English indefinite article (‘a’).

And In Exercise 8 (p.44) of the Rev. Dr. Alfred Marshall’s New Testament Greek Primer, the noted trinitarian scholar asks us to translate phoneus esti into English. (Notice that the predicate noun [phoneus, ‘murderer’] precedes the verb [esti, ‘he is’].) The answer is given on p. 153 where Dr. Marshall translates it as “He is a murderer.” – Zondervan Publishing House, 1962.

And Prof. N. Clayton Croy on p. 35 of his A Primer of Biblical Greek translates prophetes estin ho anthropos (literally, “prophet is the man”) as “The man is a prophet.” - Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1999. (Emphasis, as usual, is mine.)

In Learn New Testament Greek by John H. Dobson we find on p. 64 two interesting Greek clauses and their translations by Dobson: the clauses are: (1) prophetes estin and (2) prophetes ēn. In both of these the predicate noun (prophetes) comes before the verb (‘he is’ and ‘he was’).

Here is how Dobson has translated these two clauses: “He is a prophet.” And “He was a prophet.” – Baker Book House, 1989.

Also see p. 148, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, where trinitarians Dana and Mantey translate an example they admit is parallel to John 1:1c as “And the place was a market,” The Macmillan Company.

And noted trinitarian NT scholar, A.T. Robertson, when analyzing John 18:37b where the predicate noun “king” comes before the verb [“you say that king am I”], prefers this translation: “Yes, because I am a king.” - p. 294, Vol. 5, Word Pictures in the New Testament.

But, since the actual grammar of John (and all the other Gospel writers) shows John 1:1c to be properly translated as “and the Word was a god,” some trinitarians attempted to make this perfectly ordinary NT Greek word order into something else. In 1933, Colwell proposed that the word order could make the definite article understood! This way the understood ho (‘the’) could 'cause' Jn 1:1c to say “and the word was [the] god.” And, as we have already found, ho theos (‘the god’) always indicates “God” in English translation for John’s writing.

This necessity by some trinitarians for a new ‘rule’ is a further admission that theos by itself doesn’t mean “God” in the Gospel of John.

Another new ‘rule’ concerning the word order of John 1:1c has been proposed to make the Word of the same essence as God. These ‘Qualitative’ rules are like Colwell’s rule above except they don’t allow for an understood article (ho) before theos. They say that the word order makes theos ‘qualitative.’

The same method of examining all proper examples that are parallel to John 1:1c in John proves both relatively modern inventions to be wrong.

http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... 11c-a.html

If ever the explanations above are correct, why mostly literal word for word Bible translations render John 1:1c in English as "and the word was God"? And in Greek as, "and God was the word"?

Even the Westcott and Hort's "The New Testament in the Original Greek" render it as "and God was the word". See below;

(Greek NT Westcott and Hort+) εν G1722 PREP  αρχη G746 N-DSF  ην G1510 V-IAI-3S  ο G3588 T-NSM  λογος G3056 N-NSM  και G2532 CONJ  ο G3588 T-NSM  λογος G3056 N-NSM  ην G1510 V-IAI-3S  προς G4314 PREP  τον G3588 T-ASM  θεον G2316 N-ASM  και G2532 CONJ  θεος G2316 N-NSM  ην G1510 V-IAI-3S  ο G3588 T-NSM  λογος G3056 N-NSM 

(Apostolic Bible Polyglott+) In G1722  the beginning G746  was G1510.7.3  the G3588  word, G3056  and G2532  the G3588  word G3056  was G1510.7.3  with G4314 G3588  God, G2316  and G2532  [4God G2316  3was G1510.7.3  1the G3588  2word]. G3056 

(Greek ABP+) εν G1722  αρχη G746  ην G1510.7.3  ο G3588  λογος G3056  και G2532  ο G3588  λογος G3056  ην G1510.7.3  προς G4314  τον G3588  θεον G2316  και G2532  θεος G2316  ην G1510.7.3  ο G3588  λογος G3056 

(NASB+)  R1 In the beginning G746  was  R2 the Word G3056 , and the Word G3056  was  R3 with God G2316 , and  R4 the Word G3056  was God G2316 .

(Legacy Standard Bible+)  R1 In the beginning G746  was  R2 the Word G3056 , and the Word G3056  was  R3 with God G2316 , and  R4 the Word G3056  was God G2316 .

(NAS95+)  R1 In the beginning G746  was  R2 the Word G3056 , and the Word G3056  was  R3 with God G2316 , and  R4 the Word G3056  was God G2316 .

[onewithhim]

[Replying to tygger2 in post #63]

C.
John 1:1 in NT Greek (cont.):

But, you may ask, Isn’t there a significance to the reversed word order in the Greek (‘god was the word’) which is, in English, ‘the word was god.’?

If you will examine a good NT interlinear, you will find that word order is basically meaningless.

NT Greek authorities, Dr. Alfred Marshall and Prof. J. Gresham Machen tell us in their NT Greek primers that, unlike English, NT Greek does not use word order to convey meanings but instead uses the individual endings on each word (inflections).

“The English translation must be determined by observing the [Greek word] endings, not by observing the [word] order.” - New Testament Greek for Beginners, Machen, p. 27. (cf. New Testament Greek Primer, Marshall, pp. 7, 22 and A. T. Robertson, Grammar, p. 417.)

And in a later example illustrating predicate nouns Prof. Machen gave this example: “ho apostolos anthropos estin [word for word translation: ‘the apostle man is’],” and he translated that sentence (which has an anarthrous predicate count noun preceding the verb as in John 1:1c) as “the apostle is a man.” - p. 50, New Testament Greek For Beginners, The Macmillan Company, 1951. Notice the addition of the English indefinite article (‘a’).

And In Exercise 8 (p.44) of the Rev. Dr. Alfred Marshall’s New Testament Greek Primer, the noted trinitarian scholar asks us to translate phoneus esti into English. (Notice that the predicate noun [phoneus, ‘murderer’] precedes the verb [esti, ‘he is’].) The answer is given on p. 153 where Dr. Marshall translates it as “He is a murderer.” – Zondervan Publishing House, 1962.

And Prof. N. Clayton Croy on p. 35 of his A Primer of Biblical Greek translates prophetes estin ho anthropos (literally, “prophet is the man”) as “The man is a prophet.” - Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1999. (Emphasis, as usual, is mine.)

In Learn New Testament Greek by John H. Dobson we find on p. 64 two interesting Greek clauses and their translations by Dobson: the clauses are: (1) prophetes estin and (2) prophetes ēn. In both of these the predicate noun (prophetes) comes before the verb (‘he is’ and ‘he was’).

Here is how Dobson has translated these two clauses: “He is a prophet.” And “He was a prophet.” – Baker Book House, 1989.

Also see p. 148, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, where trinitarians Dana and Mantey translate an example they admit is parallel to John 1:1c as “And the place was a market,” The Macmillan Company.

And noted trinitarian NT scholar, A.T. Robertson, when analyzing John 18:37b where the predicate noun “king” comes before the verb [“you say that king am I”], prefers this translation: “Yes, because I am a king.” - p. 294, Vol. 5, Word Pictures in the New Testament.

But, since the actual grammar of John (and all the other Gospel writers) shows John 1:1c to be properly translated as “and the Word was a god,” some trinitarians attempted to make this perfectly ordinary NT Greek word order into something else. In 1933, Colwell proposed that the word order could make the definite article understood! This way the understood ho (‘the’) could 'cause' Jn 1:1c to say “and the word was [the] god.” And, as we have already found, ho theos (‘the god’) always indicates “God” in English translation for John’s writing.

This necessity by some trinitarians for a new ‘rule’ is a further admission that theos by itself doesn’t mean “God” in the Gospel of John.

Another new ‘rule’ concerning the word order of John 1:1c has been proposed to make the Word of the same essence as God. These ‘Qualitative’ rules are like Colwell’s rule above except they don’t allow for an understood article (ho) before theos. They say that the word order makes theos ‘qualitative.’

The same method of examining all proper examples that are parallel to John 1:1c in John proves both relatively modern inventions to be wrong.

http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... 11c-a.html

If ever the explanations above are correct, why mostly literal word for word Bible translations render John 1:1c in English as "and the word was God"? And in Greek as, "and God was the word"?

Even the Westcott and Hort's "The New Testament in the Original Greek" render it as "and God was the word". See below;

(Greek NT Westcott and Hort+) εν G1722 PREP  αρχη G746 N-DSF  ην G1510 V-IAI-3S  ο G3588 T-NSM  λογος G3056 N-NSM  και G2532 CONJ  ο G3588 T-NSM  λογος G3056 N-NSM  ην G1510 V-IAI-3S  προς G4314 PREP  τον G3588 T-ASM  θεον G2316 N-ASM  και G2532 CONJ  θεος G2316 N-NSM  ην G1510 V-IAI-3S  ο G3588 T-NSM  λογος G3056 N-NSM 

(Apostolic Bible Polyglott+) In G1722  the beginning G746  was G1510.7.3  the G3588  word, G3056  and G2532  the G3588  word G3056  was G1510.7.3  with G4314 G3588  God, G2316  and G2532  [4God G2316  3was G1510.7.3  1the G3588  2word]. G3056 

(Greek ABP+) εν G1722  αρχη G746  ην G1510.7.3  ο G3588  λογος G3056  και G2532  ο G3588  λογος G3056  ην G1510.7.3  προς G4314  τον G3588  θεον G2316  και G2532  θεος G2316  ην G1510.7.3  ο G3588  λογος G3056 

(NASB+)  R1 In the beginning G746  was  R2 the Word G3056 , and the Word G3056  was  R3 with God G2316 , and  R4 the Word G3056  was God G2316 .

(Legacy Standard Bible+)  R1 In the beginning G746  was  R2 the Word G3056 , and the Word G3056  was  R3 with God G2316 , and  R4 the Word G3056  was God G2316 .

(NAS95+)  R1 In the beginning G746  was  R2 the Word G3056 , and the Word G3056  was  R3 with God G2316 , and  R4 the Word G3056  was God G2316 .

It has been shown here that your versions are not correct, and there are at least 16 versions that render John 1:1c as "the word was a god." As Tygger indicated above, this is done when following the rules of translating Greek into English.

[Capbook]

[Replying to tygger2 in post #63]

C.
John 1:1 in NT Greek (cont.):

But, you may ask, Isn’t there a significance to the reversed word order in the Greek (‘god was the word’) which is, in English, ‘the word was god.’?

If you will examine a good NT interlinear, you will find that word order is basically meaningless.

NT Greek authorities, Dr. Alfred Marshall and Prof. J. Gresham Machen tell us in their NT Greek primers that, unlike English, NT Greek does not use word order to convey meanings but instead uses the individual endings on each word (inflections).

“The English translation must be determined by observing the [Greek word] endings, not by observing the [word] order.” - New Testament Greek for Beginners, Machen, p. 27. (cf. New Testament Greek Primer, Marshall, pp. 7, 22 and A. T. Robertson, Grammar, p. 417.)

And in a later example illustrating predicate nouns Prof. Machen gave this example: “ho apostolos anthropos estin [word for word translation: ‘the apostle man is’],” and he translated that sentence (which has an anarthrous predicate count noun preceding the verb as in John 1:1c) as “the apostle is a man.” - p. 50, New Testament Greek For Beginners, The Macmillan Company, 1951. Notice the addition of the English indefinite article (‘a’).

And In Exercise 8 (p.44) of the Rev. Dr. Alfred Marshall’s New Testament Greek Primer, the noted trinitarian scholar asks us to translate phoneus esti into English. (Notice that the predicate noun [phoneus, ‘murderer’] precedes the verb [esti, ‘he is’].) The answer is given on p. 153 where Dr. Marshall translates it as “He is a murderer.” – Zondervan Publishing House, 1962.

And Prof. N. Clayton Croy on p. 35 of his A Primer of Biblical Greek translates prophetes estin ho anthropos (literally, “prophet is the man”) as “The man is a prophet.” - Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1999. (Emphasis, as usual, is mine.)

In Learn New Testament Greek by John H. Dobson we find on p. 64 two interesting Greek clauses and their translations by Dobson: the clauses are: (1) prophetes estin and (2) prophetes ēn. In both of these the predicate noun (prophetes) comes before the verb (‘he is’ and ‘he was’).

Here is how Dobson has translated these two clauses: “He is a prophet.” And “He was a prophet.” – Baker Book House, 1989.

Also see p. 148, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, where trinitarians Dana and Mantey translate an example they admit is parallel to John 1:1c as “And the place was a market,” The Macmillan Company.

And noted trinitarian NT scholar, A.T. Robertson, when analyzing John 18:37b where the predicate noun “king” comes before the verb [“you say that king am I”], prefers this translation: “Yes, because I am a king.” - p. 294, Vol. 5, Word Pictures in the New Testament.

But, since the actual grammar of John (and all the other Gospel writers) shows John 1:1c to be properly translated as “and the Word was a god,” some trinitarians attempted to make this perfectly ordinary NT Greek word order into something else. In 1933, Colwell proposed that the word order could make the definite article understood! This way the understood ho (‘the’) could 'cause' Jn 1:1c to say “and the word was [the] god.” And, as we have already found, ho theos (‘the god’) always indicates “God” in English translation for John’s writing.

This necessity by some trinitarians for a new ‘rule’ is a further admission that theos by itself doesn’t mean “God” in the Gospel of John.

Another new ‘rule’ concerning the word order of John 1:1c has been proposed to make the Word of the same essence as God. These ‘Qualitative’ rules are like Colwell’s rule above except they don’t allow for an understood article (ho) before theos. They say that the word order makes theos ‘qualitative.’

The same method of examining all proper examples that are parallel to John 1:1c in John proves both relatively modern inventions to be wrong.

http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... 11c-a.html

If ever the explanations above are correct, why mostly literal word for word Bible translations render John 1:1c in English as "and the word was God"? And in Greek as, "and God was the word"?

Even the Westcott and Hort's "The New Testament in the Original Greek" render it as "and God was the word". See below;

(Greek NT Westcott and Hort+) εν G1722 PREP  αρχη G746 N-DSF  ην G1510 V-IAI-3S  ο G3588 T-NSM  λογος G3056 N-NSM  και G2532 CONJ  ο G3588 T-NSM  λογος G3056 N-NSM  ην G1510 V-IAI-3S  προς G4314 PREP  τον G3588 T-ASM  θεον G2316 N-ASM  και G2532 CONJ  θεος G2316 N-NSM  ην G1510 V-IAI-3S  ο G3588 T-NSM  λογος G3056 N-NSM 

(Apostolic Bible Polyglott+) In G1722  the beginning G746  was G1510.7.3  the G3588  word, G3056  and G2532  the G3588  word G3056  was G1510.7.3  with G4314 G3588  God, G2316  and G2532  [4God G2316  3was G1510.7.3  1the G3588  2word]. G3056 

(Greek ABP+) εν G1722  αρχη G746  ην G1510.7.3  ο G3588  λογος G3056  και G2532  ο G3588  λογος G3056  ην G1510.7.3  προς G4314  τον G3588  θεον G2316  και G2532  θεος G2316  ην G1510.7.3  ο G3588  λογος G3056 

(NASB+)  R1 In the beginning G746  was  R2 the Word G3056 , and the Word G3056  was  R3 with God G2316 , and  R4 the Word G3056  was God G2316 .

(Legacy Standard Bible+)  R1 In the beginning G746  was  R2 the Word G3056 , and the Word G3056  was  R3 with God G2316 , and  R4 the Word G3056  was God G2316 .

(NAS95+)  R1 In the beginning G746  was  R2 the Word G3056 , and the Word G3056  was  R3 with God G2316 , and  R4 the Word G3056  was God G2316 .

It has been shown here that your versions are not correct, and there are at least 16 versions that render John 1:1c as "the word was a god." As Tygger indicated above, this is done when following the rules of translating Greek into English.

Can you post it here with Strong Concordance or Numbers?
Because without Strong Numbers it indicate that it's a paraphrase translation.

[tygger2]

[Replying to Capbook in post #68]

Strong's number for theos in John 1:1c is 2316. It's the same number in the New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to tygger2 in post #63]

C.
John 1:1 in NT Greek (cont.):

But, you may ask, Isn’t there a significance to the reversed word order in the Greek (‘god was the word’) which is, in English, ‘the word was god.’?

If you will examine a good NT interlinear, you will find that word order is basically meaningless.

NT Greek authorities, Dr. Alfred Marshall and Prof. J. Gresham Machen tell us in their NT Greek primers that, unlike English, NT Greek does not use word order to convey meanings but instead uses the individual endings on each word (inflections).

“The English translation must be determined by observing the [Greek word] endings, not by observing the [word] order.” - New Testament Greek for Beginners, Machen, p. 27. (cf. New Testament Greek Primer, Marshall, pp. 7, 22 and A. T. Robertson, Grammar, p. 417.)

And in a later example illustrating predicate nouns Prof. Machen gave this example: “ho apostolos anthropos estin [word for word translation: ‘the apostle man is’],” and he translated that sentence (which has an anarthrous predicate count noun preceding the verb as in John 1:1c) as “the apostle is a man.” - p. 50, New Testament Greek For Beginners, The Macmillan Company, 1951. Notice the addition of the English indefinite article (‘a’).

And In Exercise 8 (p.44) of the Rev. Dr. Alfred Marshall’s New Testament Greek Primer, the noted trinitarian scholar asks us to translate phoneus esti into English. (Notice that the predicate noun [phoneus, ‘murderer’] precedes the verb [esti, ‘he is’].) The answer is given on p. 153 where Dr. Marshall translates it as “He is a murderer.” – Zondervan Publishing House, 1962.

And Prof. N. Clayton Croy on p. 35 of his A Primer of Biblical Greek translates prophetes estin ho anthropos (literally, “prophet is the man”) as “The man is a prophet.” - Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1999. (Emphasis, as usual, is mine.)

In Learn New Testament Greek by John H. Dobson we find on p. 64 two interesting Greek clauses and their translations by Dobson: the clauses are: (1) prophetes estin and (2) prophetes ēn. In both of these the predicate noun (prophetes) comes before the verb (‘he is’ and ‘he was’).

Here is how Dobson has translated these two clauses: “He is a prophet.” And “He was a prophet.” – Baker Book House, 1989.

Also see p. 148, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, where trinitarians Dana and Mantey translate an example they admit is parallel to John 1:1c as “And the place was a market,” The Macmillan Company.

And noted trinitarian NT scholar, A.T. Robertson, when analyzing John 18:37b where the predicate noun “king” comes before the verb [“you say that king am I”], prefers this translation: “Yes, because I am a king.” - p. 294, Vol. 5, Word Pictures in the New Testament.

But, since the actual grammar of John (and all the other Gospel writers) shows John 1:1c to be properly translated as “and the Word was a god,” some trinitarians attempted to make this perfectly ordinary NT Greek word order into something else. In 1933, Colwell proposed that the word order could make the definite article understood! This way the understood ho (‘the’) could 'cause' Jn 1:1c to say “and the word was [the] god.” And, as we have already found, ho theos (‘the god’) always indicates “God” in English translation for John’s writing.

This necessity by some trinitarians for a new ‘rule’ is a further admission that theos by itself doesn’t mean “God” in the Gospel of John.

Another new ‘rule’ concerning the word order of John 1:1c has been proposed to make the Word of the same essence as God. These ‘Qualitative’ rules are like Colwell’s rule above except they don’t allow for an understood article (ho) before theos. They say that the word order makes theos ‘qualitative.’

The same method of examining all proper examples that are parallel to John 1:1c in John proves both relatively modern inventions to be wrong.

http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... 11c-a.html

If ever the explanations above are correct, why mostly literal word for word Bible translations render John 1:1c in English as "and the word was God"? And in Greek as, "and God was the word"?

Even the Westcott and Hort's "The New Testament in the Original Greek" render it as "and God was the word". See below;

(Greek NT Westcott and Hort+) εν G1722 PREP  αρχη G746 N-DSF  ην G1510 V-IAI-3S  ο G3588 T-NSM  λογος G3056 N-NSM  και G2532 CONJ  ο G3588 T-NSM  λογος G3056 N-NSM  ην G1510 V-IAI-3S  προς G4314 PREP  τον G3588 T-ASM  θεον G2316 N-ASM  και G2532 CONJ  θεος G2316 N-NSM  ην G1510 V-IAI-3S  ο G3588 T-NSM  λογος G3056 N-NSM 

(Apostolic Bible Polyglott+) In G1722  the beginning G746  was G1510.7.3  the G3588  word, G3056  and G2532  the G3588  word G3056  was G1510.7.3  with G4314 G3588  God, G2316  and G2532  [4God G2316  3was G1510.7.3  1the G3588  2word]. G3056 

(Greek ABP+) εν G1722  αρχη G746  ην G1510.7.3  ο G3588  λογος G3056  και G2532  ο G3588  λογος G3056  ην G1510.7.3  προς G4314  τον G3588  θεον G2316  και G2532  θεος G2316  ην G1510.7.3  ο G3588  λογος G3056 

(NASB+)  R1 In the beginning G746  was  R2 the Word G3056 , and the Word G3056  was  R3 with God G2316 , and  R4 the Word G3056  was God G2316 .

(Legacy Standard Bible+)  R1 In the beginning G746  was  R2 the Word G3056 , and the Word G3056  was  R3 with God G2316 , and  R4 the Word G3056  was God G2316 .

(NAS95+)  R1 In the beginning G746  was  R2 the Word G3056 , and the Word G3056  was  R3 with God G2316 , and  R4 the Word G3056  was God G2316 .

It has been shown here that your versions are not correct, and there are at least 16 versions that render John 1:1c as "the word was a god." As Tygger indicated above, this is done when following the rules of translating Greek into English.

Can you post it here with Strong Concordance or Numbers?
Because without Strong Numbers it indicate that it's a paraphrase translation.

You won't reason on your own, will you. Strong's Concordance is the final word on anything, right? A paraphrased translation's definition does not rest on the opinions of Strong's Concordance. There are many versions that are not paraphrased, though for some reason you think that they are. Following the rules of translating Greek into English will guarantee the proper wording.