The New World Translation does not change John 1:1

[EastwardTraveler]

Here is a thread I started on another forum, but wanted to put it up here as well. I am new here, but I am already enjoying this forum much better. Less trolls and better discussion and attitudes.
*********************************************

This is a response to a tread about John 1:1 and how the New World Translation corrects this mistake about calling the Word "God". The NWT claims to fix this issue by calling the Word "a god". Next the assertion is there are many gods in the Bible and being a god is different than being God, implying that God is not a god. Being a god is said to be more of a title or status, and nothing could be further from the truth.

First there is a word play here does not exist in the Hebrew. There is no capitalization in Hebrew, so in English terms, there is no big or little g. The context of the scripture would have let the reader know which god is being talked about. Even from a grammatical point of view this changes nothing. Here is what I mean. It is grammatically correct and scripturally correct for me to say that "God is a god". God is just a proper pronoun letting us know which god we are talking about. A god is not a status but the nature of something. God is a god because he happens to be a spiritually divine being.

So changing John 1:1 does not change the problem of the Word being called God. You are still left with a big problem of the identity of Jesus if he was by nature an elohim.

The next tactic that will be used to to bring up that there are many gods in the Bible. This is a silly argument, because all of the other gods of the Bible are false gods or men calling themselves gods. Neither of the two pleases God, so I find it odd that this is used to justify the Word being called a god/elohim and he not be God. Lets break it down even further. Just because men made up gods and created images to them, does not make them a real god. Same if a man calls himself or another person a god, it does not make them a true god. Again this does not please God to do so.

Here is my beleif, that God/elohim is the only real god/elohim in the scriptures. All other gods/elohim are false gods/elohim. No where in scripture is it a good thing to be call a god/elohim if the thing being talked about is not God himself.

While I started off mentioning The NWT I am eager to hear from all who do not believe that Jesus is God, not just Jehovahs Witness. I prefer not to hear from Trinitarians and Unitarians on this post, but ultimately am not opposed to it.

My last request is that for those responding, try and keep it short. I do not want a page of verses quoted and a dissertation on each on. Lets try and keep it to a verse or two at a time so we can actually have a discussion that is meaningful.

Thanks and look forward to hearing from all of you out there.

[JehovahsWitness]

Here we see the the word el/elohim #430 as decribed by Strong's Exhaustive concordance concurs with me on the fact that the the word is used of God and god. True God, false god, ect. The point here is that the capitalization we see in the English really doesn't not matter and that brings me to my earlier point that in Hebrew has no capitalization and it is context that lets us know which God/god we are talking about.

Well you can't say that the capitalization "doesn't matter" and at the same time say that it reflects some information about the context. The fact that English Capitalization is largely left at the discretion of the translator doesn't invalidate its funcion. In short, in English Capitilzation is used to reflect something about the context of the word and DOES MATTER. However and this is the point, since neither Greek nor Hebrew capitalizes, and where we see a capital letter for god is largely left at the discretion of the translator, it is not something one can build an entire theology on.

If the passage explicitly means "no other God", I thought by capitalizing it we were only talking about God anyway. ...

NOTE: It is, in my personal opinion, best to use the personal name of the god being referred to rather than speak about a capital-G god and little g-god - which is , rather confusing and since capitalization varies according to translation, rather pointless. The bible almost invariably (especially in the Hebrew scriptures) identifies YHWH/Yawheh/JEHOVAH by name when speaking about Him or refers to Him uniquely as the TRUE God and Almighty God. These unique titles and His personal name mean we can usually dispense with the awkard and redundant referens to "big G- gods and little g- gods.

Do you have anything against refering to the God of the Israelites by his name (YHWH/Yahweh/Jehovah/Yehowah etc)?


JW

[JehovahsWitness]

This presents some problems of its own and brings us no closer to finding out what God wants.
For example:Hosea 13:4
King James Bible
Yet I am the LORD thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me: for there is no saviour beside me.
NWT
But I am Jehovah your God from* the land of Egypt;+You knew no God except me,And besides me there is no savior.+
JPS Tanakh 1917
Yet I am the LORD thy God From the land of Egypt; And thou knowest no God but Me, And beside Me there is no saviour.

♦NOTE When the scriptures say "know" they mean "know as in worship" All the scriptures identify YHWH as speaking so the command of YHWH/Jehovah is that the Israelite are not to worship "other gods"/"other Gods". Meaning they are to worship no other than YHWH.

This presents some problems of its own and brings us no closer to finding out what God wants. Why worry about another God is there is indeed only one and all the ancients knew this?

♦ There isn't only one god, there are millions of gods (hindus have literally millions), the Egyptians had hundreds. Only one of those many god that has the right to be worshipped.

It gets more confusing [...] Are they now a God even if they are false?

You ask:

• Are they now a God even if they are false [gods]?
  Are they now cars even if they are faulty cars?
  Are they now apples even if they are bad apples?
  Are they now girls even if they are ugly girls?

• ♦ The answer to all the above is... YES! You are confused because you are trying to impose the square peg of your own personal definition of the word (elohim), into the round hole of how the word is used in scripture (and what virtually the entire academic world accepts the word to mean). Please see Tigger2's earlier post for the correct definition of god (elohim) as used in scripture
  http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 313#868313

Elohim is a general generic title that can be applied to virtually ANYONE and ANYTHING real or imagined, good or bad, spirit or phyical that is considered to have a measure of power, authority and/or influence (real or imagined)

♦ The above definition applies to YHWH but since I said "real or imagined" the same definition applies to both false elophim and true elohim. The word itself is not specific enough to tell us more. JEHOVAH (yhwh) however is a different matter. There is only one YHWH (Jehovah). One God that has the right to be worshipped according to the bible. For the Isaelites and all those that accepted the writings of Moses and the Prophets, worship belongs only to the god called YHWH.

Are you still confused? If so perhaps you might like to share why?

JW

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 23 by brianbbs67]

So, Brian, what is your point? It's a burden, really, to read through all of those scriptures and then not find any summary by you.

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 23 by brianbbs67]

So, Brian, what is your point? It's a burden, really, to read through all of those scriptures and then not find any summary by you.

Did not mean to burden you. And I was trying to keep it short like the OP asked. I posted a list of a few verses that state, YHWH is the one true god. The God of Hosts, which I always thought was the meaning of El oh im? So, while their are other worldly beings in the host of heaven, God is in charge.

[EastwardTraveler]

[EastwardTraveler]

[Replying to post 33 by brianbbs67]

I saw and was busy with some other post. I really want to get into those verses because I do have to interesting questions on them. I have not over looked you at all.

[EastwardTraveler]

[Replying to post 23 by brianbbs67]

So, Brian, what is your point? It's a burden, really, to read through all of those scriptures and then not find any summary by you.

I believe what he is quoting and how he is quoting says it all my friend lol. I know you know, just trying to have a little levity myself.

[EastwardTraveler]

[EastwardTraveler]

[Replying to post 23 by brianbbs67]

So I was going to reply to you by simply stating what I have said over and over again about the word elohim and that a god is not different, but instead I will go a different route and answer you, JW, and the others in a different way. Look for a post labeled My final question and stance on Elohim.

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 38 by EastwardTraveler]

I will