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]

[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.

Yes, the same Strong#2316 of John 1:1b. And Thayer defined verses 1b and 1c below;

θεός theos
Thayer Definition:
1) a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities
2) the Godhead, trinity
2a) God the Father, the first person in the trinity
2b) Christ, the second person of the trinity
2c) Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity
3) spoken of the only and true God
3a) refers to the things of God
3b) his counsels, interests, things due to him
4) whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way

(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 .

[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.

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.

As for me my own reasons/opinions matter less, evidences matters more. Strong Concordance helps us find the original Bible words, while in paraphrase, other words were used. Are you not aware that other wordings than the original languages we cannot check it's definition. And translations not guided by lexicon led us to nowhere, because translations involves a degree of interpretation most especially to none Bible words being used. https://www.google.com/search?q=is+tran ... e&ie=UTF-8

[tygger2]

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, tells us:

“The reason why judges are called ‘gods’ in Ps. 82 is that they have the office of administering God’s judgment as ‘sons of the Most High’. In context of the Ps. the men in question have failed to do this.... On the other hand, Jesus fulfilled the role of a true judge as a ‘god’ and ‘son of the Most High’.” - Vol. 3, p. 187.

The highly respected (and highly trinitarian) W. E. Vine tells us:

“The word [theos, ‘god’ or ‘God’] is used of Divinely appointed judges in Israel, as representing God in His authority, John 10:34” - p. 491, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.[Replying to Capbook in post #72]

Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Abingdon, 1974 printing,

“430. [elohim]. el-o-heem’; plural of 433; gods in the ordinary sense; but spec. used (in the plur. thus, esp. with the art.) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, ... x (very) great, judges, x mighty.” - p. 12, “Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary.”

The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, 1979, Hendrickson, p. 43:

Elohim: “a. rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power.... b. divine ones, superhuman beings including God and angels.... c. angels Ps. 97 7 ...”

Some of the trinitarian sources which admit that the Bible actually describes men who represent God (judges, Israelite kings, etc.) and God’s angels as gods include:

1. Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Bible, “Hints and Helps...,” Eerdmans, 1978 reprint;

2. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #430, Hebrew and Chaldee Dict., Abingdon, 1974;

3. New Bible Dictionary, p. 1133, Tyndale House Publ., 1984;

4. Today’s Dictionary of the Bible, p. 208, Bethany House Publ., 1982;

5. Hastings’ A Dictionary of the Bible, p. 217, Vol. 2;

6. The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, p. 43, Hendrickson publ.,1979;

7. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, #2316 (4.), Thayer, Baker Book House, 1984 printing;

8. The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, p. 132, Vol. 1; and p. 1265, Vol. 2, Eerdmans, 1984;

9. The NIV Study Bible, footnotes for Ps. 45:6; Ps. 82:1, 6; and Jn 10:34; Zondervan, 1985;

10. New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., footnote for Ps. 45:7, 1970 ed.;

11. A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures, Vol. 5, pp. 188-189;

12. William G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, Vol. 1, pp. 317, 324, Nelson Publ., 1980 printing;

13. Murray J. Harris, Jesus As God, p. 202, Baker Book House, 1992;

14. William Barclay, The Gospel of John, V. 2, Daily Study Bible Series, pp. 77, 78, Westminster Press, 1975;

15. The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible (John 10:34 and Ps. 82:6);

16. The Fourfold Gospel (Note for John 10:35);

17. Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Jamieson, Fausset, Brown
(John 10:34-36);

18. Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible (Deut. 10:17; Ps. 82:6-8 and John 10:35);

19. John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible (Ps. 82:1).

20. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament ('Little Kittel'), - p. 328, Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1985.

21. The Expositor’s Greek Testament, pp. 794-795, Vol. 1, Eerdmans Publishing Co.

22. The Amplified Bible, Ps. 82:1, 6 and John 10:34, 35, Zondervan Publ., 1965.

23. Barnes' Notes on the New Testament, John 10:34, 35.

24. B. W. Johnson's People's New Testament, John 10:34-36.

25. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, Vol. 3, p. 187.

26. Fairbairn’s Imperial Standard Bible Encyclopedia, p. 24, vol. III, Zondervan, 1957 reprint.

27. Theological Dictionary, Rahner and Vorgrimler, p. 20, Herder and Herder, 1965.

28. Pastor Jon Courson, The Gospel According to John.

29. Vincent’s New Testament Word Studies, John 10:36.

30. C. J. Ellicott, John 10:34, Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers.

(Also John 10:34, 35 - CEV: TEV; GodsWord; The Message; NLT; NIRV; David Guzik - http://www.blbclassic.org/commentaries/ ... topic=John )

And the earliest Christians like the highly respected NT scholar Origen (see DEF note #1) and others - - including Tertullian; Justin Martyr; Hippolytus; Clement of Alexandria; Theophilus (p. 9, DEF); the writer of “The Epistle to Diognetus”; and even super-trinitarians Athanasius and St. Augustine - - also had this understanding for “a god.” And, as we saw above, many highly respected NT scholars of this century agree.

[Capbook]

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, tells us:

“The reason why judges are called ‘gods’ in Ps. 82 is that they have the office of administering God’s judgment as ‘sons of the Most High’. In context of the Ps. the men in question have failed to do this.... On the other hand, Jesus fulfilled the role of a true judge as a ‘god’ and ‘son of the Most High’.” - Vol. 3, p. 187.

The highly respected (and highly trinitarian) W. E. Vine tells us:

“The word [theos, ‘god’ or ‘God’] is used of Divinely appointed judges in Israel, as representing God in His authority, John 10:34” - p. 491, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.[Replying to Capbook in post #72]

Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Abingdon, 1974 printing,

“430. [elohim]. el-o-heem’; plural of 433; gods in the ordinary sense; but spec. used (in the plur. thus, esp. with the art.) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, ... x (very) great, judges, x mighty.” - p. 12, “Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary.”

The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, 1979, Hendrickson, p. 43:

Elohim: “a. rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power.... b. divine ones, superhuman beings including God and angels.... c. angels Ps. 97 7 ...”

Some of the trinitarian sources which admit that the Bible actually describes men who represent God (judges, Israelite kings, etc.) and God’s angels as gods include:

1. Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Bible, “Hints and Helps...,” Eerdmans, 1978 reprint;

2. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #430, Hebrew and Chaldee Dict., Abingdon, 1974;

3. New Bible Dictionary, p. 1133, Tyndale House Publ., 1984;

4. Today’s Dictionary of the Bible, p. 208, Bethany House Publ., 1982;

5. Hastings’ A Dictionary of the Bible, p. 217, Vol. 2;

6. The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, p. 43, Hendrickson publ.,1979;

7. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, #2316 (4.), Thayer, Baker Book House, 1984 printing;

8. The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, p. 132, Vol. 1; and p. 1265, Vol. 2, Eerdmans, 1984;

9. The NIV Study Bible, footnotes for Ps. 45:6; Ps. 82:1, 6; and Jn 10:34; Zondervan, 1985;

10. New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., footnote for Ps. 45:7, 1970 ed.;

11. A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures, Vol. 5, pp. 188-189;

12. William G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, Vol. 1, pp. 317, 324, Nelson Publ., 1980 printing;

13. Murray J. Harris, Jesus As God, p. 202, Baker Book House, 1992;

14. William Barclay, The Gospel of John, V. 2, Daily Study Bible Series, pp. 77, 78, Westminster Press, 1975;

15. The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible (John 10:34 and Ps. 82:6);

16. The Fourfold Gospel (Note for John 10:35);

17. Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Jamieson, Fausset, Brown
(John 10:34-36);

18. Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible (Deut. 10:17; Ps. 82:6-8 and John 10:35);

19. John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible (Ps. 82:1).

20. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament ('Little Kittel'), - p. 328, Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1985.

21. The Expositor’s Greek Testament, pp. 794-795, Vol. 1, Eerdmans Publishing Co.

22. The Amplified Bible, Ps. 82:1, 6 and John 10:34, 35, Zondervan Publ., 1965.

23. Barnes' Notes on the New Testament, John 10:34, 35.

24. B. W. Johnson's People's New Testament, John 10:34-36.

25. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, Vol. 3, p. 187.

26. Fairbairn’s Imperial Standard Bible Encyclopedia, p. 24, vol. III, Zondervan, 1957 reprint.

27. Theological Dictionary, Rahner and Vorgrimler, p. 20, Herder and Herder, 1965.

28. Pastor Jon Courson, The Gospel According to John.

29. Vincent’s New Testament Word Studies, John 10:36.

30. C. J. Ellicott, John 10:34, Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers.

(Also John 10:34, 35 - CEV: TEV; GodsWord; The Message; NLT; NIRV; David Guzik - http://www.blbclassic.org/commentaries/ ... topic=John )

And the earliest Christians like the highly respected NT scholar Origen (see DEF note #1) and others - - including Tertullian; Justin Martyr; Hippolytus; Clement of Alexandria; Theophilus (p. 9, DEF); the writer of “The Epistle to Diognetus”; and even super-trinitarians Athanasius and St. Augustine - - also had this understanding for “a god.” And, as we saw above, many highly respected NT scholars of this century agree.

You posted reference texts, can't you post those text itself for ready reference?
I just wonder why Arians just alter one verse, John 1:1c as "a god" where next verses of same chapter does not have an "a" like; 2,6,12,13 and specially verse 18 below;

John 1:18
18 No man has seen God at any time; God the only Son, who is in the arms of the Father, He has explained Him.
NASB

[onewithhim]

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, tells us:

“The reason why judges are called ‘gods’ in Ps. 82 is that they have the office of administering God’s judgment as ‘sons of the Most High’. In context of the Ps. the men in question have failed to do this.... On the other hand, Jesus fulfilled the role of a true judge as a ‘god’ and ‘son of the Most High’.” - Vol. 3, p. 187.

The highly respected (and highly trinitarian) W. E. Vine tells us:

“The word [theos, ‘god’ or ‘God’] is used of Divinely appointed judges in Israel, as representing God in His authority, John 10:34” - p. 491, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.[Replying to Capbook in post #72]

Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Abingdon, 1974 printing,

“430. [elohim]. el-o-heem’; plural of 433; gods in the ordinary sense; but spec. used (in the plur. thus, esp. with the art.) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, ... x (very) great, judges, x mighty.” - p. 12, “Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary.”

The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, 1979, Hendrickson, p. 43:

Elohim: “a. rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power.... b. divine ones, superhuman beings including God and angels.... c. angels Ps. 97 7 ...”

Some of the trinitarian sources which admit that the Bible actually describes men who represent God (judges, Israelite kings, etc.) and God’s angels as gods include:

1. Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Bible, “Hints and Helps...,” Eerdmans, 1978 reprint;

2. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #430, Hebrew and Chaldee Dict., Abingdon, 1974;

3. New Bible Dictionary, p. 1133, Tyndale House Publ., 1984;

4. Today’s Dictionary of the Bible, p. 208, Bethany House Publ., 1982;

5. Hastings’ A Dictionary of the Bible, p. 217, Vol. 2;

6. The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, p. 43, Hendrickson publ.,1979;

7. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, #2316 (4.), Thayer, Baker Book House, 1984 printing;

8. The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, p. 132, Vol. 1; and p. 1265, Vol. 2, Eerdmans, 1984;

9. The NIV Study Bible, footnotes for Ps. 45:6; Ps. 82:1, 6; and Jn 10:34; Zondervan, 1985;

10. New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., footnote for Ps. 45:7, 1970 ed.;

11. A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures, Vol. 5, pp. 188-189;

12. William G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, Vol. 1, pp. 317, 324, Nelson Publ., 1980 printing;

13. Murray J. Harris, Jesus As God, p. 202, Baker Book House, 1992;

14. William Barclay, The Gospel of John, V. 2, Daily Study Bible Series, pp. 77, 78, Westminster Press, 1975;

15. The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible (John 10:34 and Ps. 82:6);

16. The Fourfold Gospel (Note for John 10:35);

17. Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Jamieson, Fausset, Brown
(John 10:34-36);

18. Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible (Deut. 10:17; Ps. 82:6-8 and John 10:35);

19. John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible (Ps. 82:1).

20. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament ('Little Kittel'), - p. 328, Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1985.

21. The Expositor’s Greek Testament, pp. 794-795, Vol. 1, Eerdmans Publishing Co.

22. The Amplified Bible, Ps. 82:1, 6 and John 10:34, 35, Zondervan Publ., 1965.

23. Barnes' Notes on the New Testament, John 10:34, 35.

24. B. W. Johnson's People's New Testament, John 10:34-36.

25. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, Vol. 3, p. 187.

26. Fairbairn’s Imperial Standard Bible Encyclopedia, p. 24, vol. III, Zondervan, 1957 reprint.

27. Theological Dictionary, Rahner and Vorgrimler, p. 20, Herder and Herder, 1965.

28. Pastor Jon Courson, The Gospel According to John.

29. Vincent’s New Testament Word Studies, John 10:36.

30. C. J. Ellicott, John 10:34, Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers.

(Also John 10:34, 35 - CEV: TEV; GodsWord; The Message; NLT; NIRV; David Guzik - http://www.blbclassic.org/commentaries/ ... topic=John )

And the earliest Christians like the highly respected NT scholar Origen (see DEF note #1) and others - - including Tertullian; Justin Martyr; Hippolytus; Clement of Alexandria; Theophilus (p. 9, DEF); the writer of “The Epistle to Diognetus”; and even super-trinitarians Athanasius and St. Augustine - - also had this understanding for “a god.” And, as we saw above, many highly respected NT scholars of this century agree.

You posted reference texts, can't you post those text itself for ready reference?
I just wonder why Arians just alter one verse, John 1:1c as "a god" where next verses of same chapter does not have an "a" like; 2,6,12,13 and specially verse 18 below;

John 1:18
18 No man has seen God at any time; God the only Son, who is in the arms of the Father, He has explained Him.
NASB

The rule for the addition of "a" has been explained many times. It's useless to keep going over it and it's too bad that you don't understand what it means to translate the Greek into English.

Now, there are at least 16 to 30 versions of the Bible (that have been posted on this thread) that say "the only begotten SON," not the only begotten God. John 1:18 is not a good verse for you to prove Jesus is God. Manuscripts differ. The newer ones are more likely to take liberties with the verses, in many cases.

[tygger2]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #75]

...........................................................


All Predicate Nouns Found in John’s Writings part 1

John

an. 1:1

art. 1:4 - prep.

art. 1:8

an. 1:12 - prep.

an. 1:14 - plural (AMOUNT)

art. 1:15

art. 1:19 - prep.

art. 1:20

art. 1:21

an. 1:23 - prep. - NO VERB

art. 1:25

art. 1:33 - participle (p.n.)

art. 1:34 - prep.

an. 1:41 (?)

art. 1:49 (a) - prep.

an. 1:49 (b) - prep.

an. 2:9 - accusative, not p.n.

an. 3:6 (a) - AMOUNT/part. (s)

an. 3:6 (b) -abstract +/part. (s)

art. 3:10 - prep.

art. 3:19

art. 3:28

an. 3:29 - participle (s)

an. 4:9 (a)

an. 4:9 (b) - adj.?

an. 4:14 - prep.

an. 4:18 - prep.

an. 4:19

an. 4:24 – abstract (?) - NO VERB

art. 4:29

art. 4:37 (a) - participle (p.n.)

art. 4:37 (b) - participle (p.n.)

art. 4:42 - prep.

an. 5:9 - “time/season”

an. 5:10 - “time/season”

art. 5:12

art. 5:15 - participle (p.n.)

an. 5:27 - prep.

art. 5:35

art. 6:14 (the prophet)

art. 6:33 - participle (p.n.)

art. 6:35 - prep.

art. 6:39 - prep.

art. 6:40 - prep.

art. 6:41

art. 6:48 - prep.

art. 6:50

art. 6:51 (a)

art. 6:51 (b) - prep.

an. 6:55 (a) - plural (AMOUNT)

an. 6:55 (b) - plural (AMOUNT)

art. 6:58

an. 6:63a - abstract/part. (p.n)

an. 6:63b - abstract

art. 6:64 (a) - part. (p.n.)

art. 6:64 (b) - part. (p.n.)

art. 6:69 - prep.

an. 6:70

art. 7:26

art. 7:36

art. 7:40

art. 7:41

art. 8:12 - prep.

art. 8:18 - part. (p.n.)

an. 8:31 - prep.

an. 8:33 - prep.

an. 8:34 - prep.

an. 8:37 - prep.

art. 8:39a - prep. - RSV, NIV

an. 8:39b - prep.

an. 8:42 - prep.

an. 8:44 (a)

an. 8:44 (b) - no subject

an. 8:48

an. 8:54 (a) - abstract

an. 8:54 (b) - prep.

an. 8:55

an. 9:5 - prep.

an. 9:8 (a) - no subject

art. 9:8 (b) - part. (p.n.)

an. 9:14 - “time/season”

an. 9:17 - no subject

art. 9:19 - prep.

art. 9:20 - prep.

an. 9:24

an. 9:25 - no subject

an. 9:27 - prep.

an. 9:28 (a) - prep.

an. 9:28 (b) - prep.

an. 10:1

an. 10:2 - prep./part. (s)

art. 10:7 - prep.

an. 10:8 - plural

art. 10:9

art. 10:11

an. 10:12 - no subject

an. 10:13 - no subject

art. 10:14

an. 10:16 - numeral

art. 10:21 - prep.

an. 10:22 (or :23) - “time/season”

art. 10:24

an. 10:33

an. 10:34 - plural

an. 10:36 - prep.

art. 11:25

art. 11:27

an. 11:38

an. 11:49 - prep.

an. 11:51 - prep.

an. 12:6 - no subject

an. 12:36 - prep.

an. 12:50 - abstract

an. 13:35 - prep. (poss. pronoun)

art. 14:6 - abstract (?)

art. 15:1 (a)

art. 15:1 (b)

art. 15:5 (a)

art. 15:5 (b) - NO VERB

an. 15:8 - prep.

art. 15:12 - possessive

an. 15:14 - prep.

art. 17:3 - abstract

an. 17:17 - abstract

an. 18:13 (a) - prep.

an. 18:13 (b) - prep.

art. 18:14 - part. (p.n.)

an. 18:26 - prep.

art. 18:33 - prep.

an. 18:35

an. 18:37 (a)

an. 18:37 (b) - no subject

an. 18:38 - abstract

an. 18:40

an. 19:12 - prep.

an. 19:14 - prep.

an. 19:21 - prep.

an. 19:31 - “time/season”

an. 19:38 - prep.

art. 20:15

art. 20:31

art. 21:7 (a)

art. 21:7 (b)

art. 21:12

art. 21:20

art. 21:24

[tygger2]

[Replying to tygger2 in post #76]

Part 2

1 John

art. 1:5 (a)

an. 1:5 (b) - abstract +

an. 2:2 - prep.

an. 2:4 - participle (s)

an. 2:18 (a) - “time/season”

an. 2:18 (b) - “time/season”

art. 2:22 (a)

art. 2:22 (b)

art. 2:22 (c)

art. 2:25

an. 2:27 - no subject

an. 3:2 - prep.

art. 3:4 - abstract

art. 3:11

an. 3:15 - participle (s)

art. 3:23 - prep.

art. 4:3 - prep.

an. 4:8 - abstract +

art. 4:15 - prep.

an. 4:16 - abstract +

an. 4:20 - no subject

art. 5:1

art. 5:3 - prep.

art. 5:4

art. 5:5 (a)

art. 5:5 (b) - prep.

art. 5:6 (a) - part. (p.n.)

art. 5:6 (b) - part. (p.n.)

art. 5:6 (c) - abstract

art. 5:9 - prep.

art. 5:11

art. 5:14

an. 5:17 - abstract +

art. 5:20

　



------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 John

art. :6 (a) - abstract

art. :6 (b)

art. :7



----------------------------------------------------------------------------


　

Revelation

art. 1:8

art. 1:17

an. 1:20 (a) - prep.

an. 1:20 (b) - numeral

an. 2:9 - accusative, not p.n.

art. 2:23 - part. (p.n.)

an. 3:9 - accusative, not p.n.

art. 4:5 - prep. - numeral

art. 5:6 - prep. - numeral

art. 5:8 - prep.

an. 8:8 - plural (AMOUNT)

art. 11:4

an. 13:18 - prep.

an. 14:4 - no subject/plural

an. 16:3 - plural (AMOUNT)

an. 16:4 - plural (AMOUNT)

an. 16:14 - prep.

an. 17:9 - numeral

an. 17:10 - numeral

an. 17:11 - numeral

an. 17:12 - numeral

an. 17:14 - prep.

an. 17:15 - plural

art. 17:18

an. 18:2 - prep.

an. 18:7 - no subject

art. 19:8 - prep.

art. 19:9 - prep.

an. 19:10 (a) - prep.

art. 19:10 (b) - prep.

an. 20:2

art. 20:5 - numeral

an. 20:6 - prep.

art. 20:14 - numeral

an. 21:3 - prep.

art. 21:6

an. 21:7 (a) - prep.

an. 21:7 (b) - prep.

art. 21:8 - numeral

an. 21:21 - no verb

an. 21:22 - prep.

art. 21:23 - prep. - NO VERB

an. 22:9 - prep.

art. 22:13 - NO VERB

art. 22:16 - prep.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

“an.” - before the verse number means “anarthrous” or “without a definite article” in
the NT Greek.

“art.” - before the verse number means “articular” or “with a definite article” in the NT Greek.

Look at all the nouns with an. These are in the Greek without the definite article similar to John 11c. Most of them which are concrete nouns (like "god" in Jn 1:1c will have "a" added by the translator. Go ahead, find an interlinear and see.

[Capbook]

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, tells us:

“The reason why judges are called ‘gods’ in Ps. 82 is that they have the office of administering God’s judgment as ‘sons of the Most High’. In context of the Ps. the men in question have failed to do this.... On the other hand, Jesus fulfilled the role of a true judge as a ‘god’ and ‘son of the Most High’.” - Vol. 3, p. 187.

The highly respected (and highly trinitarian) W. E. Vine tells us:

“The word [theos, ‘god’ or ‘God’] is used of Divinely appointed judges in Israel, as representing God in His authority, John 10:34” - p. 491, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.[Replying to Capbook in post #72]

Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Abingdon, 1974 printing,

“430. [elohim]. el-o-heem’; plural of 433; gods in the ordinary sense; but spec. used (in the plur. thus, esp. with the art.) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, ... x (very) great, judges, x mighty.” - p. 12, “Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary.”

The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, 1979, Hendrickson, p. 43:

Elohim: “a. rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power.... b. divine ones, superhuman beings including God and angels.... c. angels Ps. 97 7 ...”

Some of the trinitarian sources which admit that the Bible actually describes men who represent God (judges, Israelite kings, etc.) and God’s angels as gods include:

1. Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Bible, “Hints and Helps...,” Eerdmans, 1978 reprint;

2. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #430, Hebrew and Chaldee Dict., Abingdon, 1974;

3. New Bible Dictionary, p. 1133, Tyndale House Publ., 1984;

4. Today’s Dictionary of the Bible, p. 208, Bethany House Publ., 1982;

5. Hastings’ A Dictionary of the Bible, p. 217, Vol. 2;

6. The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, p. 43, Hendrickson publ.,1979;

7. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, #2316 (4.), Thayer, Baker Book House, 1984 printing;

8. The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, p. 132, Vol. 1; and p. 1265, Vol. 2, Eerdmans, 1984;

9. The NIV Study Bible, footnotes for Ps. 45:6; Ps. 82:1, 6; and Jn 10:34; Zondervan, 1985;

10. New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., footnote for Ps. 45:7, 1970 ed.;

11. A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures, Vol. 5, pp. 188-189;

12. William G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, Vol. 1, pp. 317, 324, Nelson Publ., 1980 printing;

13. Murray J. Harris, Jesus As God, p. 202, Baker Book House, 1992;

14. William Barclay, The Gospel of John, V. 2, Daily Study Bible Series, pp. 77, 78, Westminster Press, 1975;

15. The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible (John 10:34 and Ps. 82:6);

16. The Fourfold Gospel (Note for John 10:35);

17. Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Jamieson, Fausset, Brown
(John 10:34-36);

18. Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible (Deut. 10:17; Ps. 82:6-8 and John 10:35);

19. John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible (Ps. 82:1).

20. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament ('Little Kittel'), - p. 328, Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1985.

21. The Expositor’s Greek Testament, pp. 794-795, Vol. 1, Eerdmans Publishing Co.

22. The Amplified Bible, Ps. 82:1, 6 and John 10:34, 35, Zondervan Publ., 1965.

23. Barnes' Notes on the New Testament, John 10:34, 35.

24. B. W. Johnson's People's New Testament, John 10:34-36.

25. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, Vol. 3, p. 187.

26. Fairbairn’s Imperial Standard Bible Encyclopedia, p. 24, vol. III, Zondervan, 1957 reprint.

27. Theological Dictionary, Rahner and Vorgrimler, p. 20, Herder and Herder, 1965.

28. Pastor Jon Courson, The Gospel According to John.

29. Vincent’s New Testament Word Studies, John 10:36.

30. C. J. Ellicott, John 10:34, Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers.

(Also John 10:34, 35 - CEV: TEV; GodsWord; The Message; NLT; NIRV; David Guzik - http://www.blbclassic.org/commentaries/ ... topic=John )

And the earliest Christians like the highly respected NT scholar Origen (see DEF note #1) and others - - including Tertullian; Justin Martyr; Hippolytus; Clement of Alexandria; Theophilus (p. 9, DEF); the writer of “The Epistle to Diognetus”; and even super-trinitarians Athanasius and St. Augustine - - also had this understanding for “a god.” And, as we saw above, many highly respected NT scholars of this century agree.

You posted reference texts, can't you post those text itself for ready reference?
I just wonder why Arians just alter one verse, John 1:1c as "a god" where next verses of same chapter does not have an "a" like; 2,6,12,13 and specially verse 18 below;

John 1:18
18 No man has seen God at any time; God the only Son, who is in the arms of the Father, He has explained Him.
NASB

The rule for the addition of "a" has been explained many times. It's useless to keep going over it and it's too bad that you don't understand what it means to translate the Greek into English.

Now, there are at least 16 to 30 versions of the Bible (that have been posted on this thread) that say "the only begotten SON," not the only begotten God. John 1:18 is not a good verse for you to prove Jesus is God. Manuscripts differ. The newer ones are more likely to take liberties with the verses, in many cases.

Why based heavily on translation? Can't we go to original language Greek? Translation inherently involves interpretation, you will be interpreting which was already interpreted, especially paraphrase translation that changed Bible words. https://www.google.com/search?q=do+tran ... e&ie=UTF-8

Westcott and Hort's The New Testament in the Original Greek rendered John 1:1c as "and God was the word."
Note: it is not a translation it is original Greek of the New Testament. The pioneers of modern textual criticism,
they developed a new approach to determining the original text of the New Testament by examining various Greek manuscripts. Methodological approach, they used internal and external criteria to evaluate manuscript readings, including the age of the manuscript, its linguistic style, and its relation to other manuscript. See original Greek below;

Jhn 1:1 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    λογος G3056 N-NSM 

Jesus as the only-begotten God in John 1:18 was supported by the original wordings of the oldest papyrus, the papyrus 66, the manuscript contains John 1:1–6:11, 6:35b–14:26, 29–30; 15:2–26; 16:2–4, 6–7; 16:10–20:20, 22–23; 20:25–21:9, 12, 17. It is one of the oldest well-preserved New Testament manuscripts known to exist.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_6 ... 20remained.

Followed by papyrus 75, is an early Greek New Testament manuscript written on papyrus containing text from the Gospel of Luke 3:18–24:53, and John 1:1–15:8.1  It is generally described as "the most significant" papyrus of the New Testament to be discovered so far. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_75

Yes, there are various reading about "Son" but those manuscripts were not the oldest.

[onewithhim]

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, tells us:

“The reason why judges are called ‘gods’ in Ps. 82 is that they have the office of administering God’s judgment as ‘sons of the Most High’. In context of the Ps. the men in question have failed to do this.... On the other hand, Jesus fulfilled the role of a true judge as a ‘god’ and ‘son of the Most High’.” - Vol. 3, p. 187.

The highly respected (and highly trinitarian) W. E. Vine tells us:

“The word [theos, ‘god’ or ‘God’] is used of Divinely appointed judges in Israel, as representing God in His authority, John 10:34” - p. 491, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.[Replying to Capbook in post #72]

Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Abingdon, 1974 printing,

“430. [elohim]. el-o-heem’; plural of 433; gods in the ordinary sense; but spec. used (in the plur. thus, esp. with the art.) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, ... x (very) great, judges, x mighty.” - p. 12, “Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary.”

The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, 1979, Hendrickson, p. 43:

Elohim: “a. rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power.... b. divine ones, superhuman beings including God and angels.... c. angels Ps. 97 7 ...”

Some of the trinitarian sources which admit that the Bible actually describes men who represent God (judges, Israelite kings, etc.) and God’s angels as gods include:

1. Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Bible, “Hints and Helps...,” Eerdmans, 1978 reprint;

2. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #430, Hebrew and Chaldee Dict., Abingdon, 1974;

3. New Bible Dictionary, p. 1133, Tyndale House Publ., 1984;

4. Today’s Dictionary of the Bible, p. 208, Bethany House Publ., 1982;

5. Hastings’ A Dictionary of the Bible, p. 217, Vol. 2;

6. The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, p. 43, Hendrickson publ.,1979;

7. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, #2316 (4.), Thayer, Baker Book House, 1984 printing;

8. The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, p. 132, Vol. 1; and p. 1265, Vol. 2, Eerdmans, 1984;

9. The NIV Study Bible, footnotes for Ps. 45:6; Ps. 82:1, 6; and Jn 10:34; Zondervan, 1985;

10. New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., footnote for Ps. 45:7, 1970 ed.;

11. A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures, Vol. 5, pp. 188-189;

12. William G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, Vol. 1, pp. 317, 324, Nelson Publ., 1980 printing;

13. Murray J. Harris, Jesus As God, p. 202, Baker Book House, 1992;

14. William Barclay, The Gospel of John, V. 2, Daily Study Bible Series, pp. 77, 78, Westminster Press, 1975;

15. The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible (John 10:34 and Ps. 82:6);

16. The Fourfold Gospel (Note for John 10:35);

17. Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Jamieson, Fausset, Brown
(John 10:34-36);

18. Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible (Deut. 10:17; Ps. 82:6-8 and John 10:35);

19. John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible (Ps. 82:1).

20. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament ('Little Kittel'), - p. 328, Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1985.

21. The Expositor’s Greek Testament, pp. 794-795, Vol. 1, Eerdmans Publishing Co.

22. The Amplified Bible, Ps. 82:1, 6 and John 10:34, 35, Zondervan Publ., 1965.

23. Barnes' Notes on the New Testament, John 10:34, 35.

24. B. W. Johnson's People's New Testament, John 10:34-36.

25. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, Vol. 3, p. 187.

26. Fairbairn’s Imperial Standard Bible Encyclopedia, p. 24, vol. III, Zondervan, 1957 reprint.

27. Theological Dictionary, Rahner and Vorgrimler, p. 20, Herder and Herder, 1965.

28. Pastor Jon Courson, The Gospel According to John.

29. Vincent’s New Testament Word Studies, John 10:36.

30. C. J. Ellicott, John 10:34, Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers.

(Also John 10:34, 35 - CEV: TEV; GodsWord; The Message; NLT; NIRV; David Guzik - http://www.blbclassic.org/commentaries/ ... topic=John )

And the earliest Christians like the highly respected NT scholar Origen (see DEF note #1) and others - - including Tertullian; Justin Martyr; Hippolytus; Clement of Alexandria; Theophilus (p. 9, DEF); the writer of “The Epistle to Diognetus”; and even super-trinitarians Athanasius and St. Augustine - - also had this understanding for “a god.” And, as we saw above, many highly respected NT scholars of this century agree.

You posted reference texts, can't you post those text itself for ready reference?
I just wonder why Arians just alter one verse, John 1:1c as "a god" where next verses of same chapter does not have an "a" like; 2,6,12,13 and specially verse 18 below;

John 1:18
18 No man has seen God at any time; God the only Son, who is in the arms of the Father, He has explained Him.
NASB

The rule for the addition of "a" has been explained many times. It's useless to keep going over it and it's too bad that you don't understand what it means to translate the Greek into English.

Now, there are at least 16 to 30 versions of the Bible (that have been posted on this thread) that say "the only begotten SON," not the only begotten God. John 1:18 is not a good verse for you to prove Jesus is God. Manuscripts differ. The newer ones are more likely to take liberties with the verses, in many cases.

Why based heavily on translation? Can't we go to original language Greek? Translation inherently involves interpretation, you will be interpreting which was already interpreted, especially paraphrase translation that changed Bible words. https://www.google.com/search?q=do+tran ... e&ie=UTF-8

Westcott and Hort's The New Testament in the Original Greek rendered John 1:1c as "and God was the word."
Note: it is not a translation it is original Greek of the New Testament. The pioneers of modern textual criticism,
they developed a new approach to determining the original text of the New Testament by examining various Greek manuscripts. Methodological approach, they used internal and external criteria to evaluate manuscript readings, including the age of the manuscript, its linguistic style, and its relation to other manuscript. See original Greek below;

Jhn 1:1 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    λογος G3056 N-NSM 

Jesus as the only-begotten God in John 1:18 was supported by the original wordings of the oldest papyrus, the papyrus 66, the manuscript contains John 1:1–6:11, 6:35b–14:26, 29–30; 15:2–26; 16:2–4, 6–7; 16:10–20:20, 22–23; 20:25–21:9, 12, 17. It is one of the oldest well-preserved New Testament manuscripts known to exist.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_6 ... 20remained.

Followed by papyrus 75, is an early Greek New Testament manuscript written on papyrus containing text from the Gospel of Luke 3:18–24:53, and John 1:1–15:8.1  It is generally described as "the most significant" papyrus of the New Testament to be discovered so far. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_75

Yes, there are various reading about "Son" but those manuscripts were not the oldest.

Well, then, what do those manuscripts actually say about John 1:1c and John 1:18?

[Capbook]

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, tells us:

“The reason why judges are called ‘gods’ in Ps. 82 is that they have the office of administering God’s judgment as ‘sons of the Most High’. In context of the Ps. the men in question have failed to do this.... On the other hand, Jesus fulfilled the role of a true judge as a ‘god’ and ‘son of the Most High’.” - Vol. 3, p. 187.

The highly respected (and highly trinitarian) W. E. Vine tells us:

“The word [theos, ‘god’ or ‘God’] is used of Divinely appointed judges in Israel, as representing God in His authority, John 10:34” - p. 491, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.[Replying to Capbook in post #72]

Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Abingdon, 1974 printing,

“430. [elohim]. el-o-heem’; plural of 433; gods in the ordinary sense; but spec. used (in the plur. thus, esp. with the art.) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, ... x (very) great, judges, x mighty.” - p. 12, “Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary.”

The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, 1979, Hendrickson, p. 43:

Elohim: “a. rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power.... b. divine ones, superhuman beings including God and angels.... c. angels Ps. 97 7 ...”

Some of the trinitarian sources which admit that the Bible actually describes men who represent God (judges, Israelite kings, etc.) and God’s angels as gods include:

1. Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Bible, “Hints and Helps...,” Eerdmans, 1978 reprint;

2. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #430, Hebrew and Chaldee Dict., Abingdon, 1974;

3. New Bible Dictionary, p. 1133, Tyndale House Publ., 1984;

4. Today’s Dictionary of the Bible, p. 208, Bethany House Publ., 1982;

5. Hastings’ A Dictionary of the Bible, p. 217, Vol. 2;

6. The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, p. 43, Hendrickson publ.,1979;

7. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, #2316 (4.), Thayer, Baker Book House, 1984 printing;

8. The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, p. 132, Vol. 1; and p. 1265, Vol. 2, Eerdmans, 1984;

9. The NIV Study Bible, footnotes for Ps. 45:6; Ps. 82:1, 6; and Jn 10:34; Zondervan, 1985;

10. New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., footnote for Ps. 45:7, 1970 ed.;

11. A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures, Vol. 5, pp. 188-189;

12. William G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, Vol. 1, pp. 317, 324, Nelson Publ., 1980 printing;

13. Murray J. Harris, Jesus As God, p. 202, Baker Book House, 1992;

14. William Barclay, The Gospel of John, V. 2, Daily Study Bible Series, pp. 77, 78, Westminster Press, 1975;

15. The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible (John 10:34 and Ps. 82:6);

16. The Fourfold Gospel (Note for John 10:35);

17. Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Jamieson, Fausset, Brown
(John 10:34-36);

18. Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible (Deut. 10:17; Ps. 82:6-8 and John 10:35);

19. John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible (Ps. 82:1).

20. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament ('Little Kittel'), - p. 328, Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1985.

21. The Expositor’s Greek Testament, pp. 794-795, Vol. 1, Eerdmans Publishing Co.

22. The Amplified Bible, Ps. 82:1, 6 and John 10:34, 35, Zondervan Publ., 1965.

23. Barnes' Notes on the New Testament, John 10:34, 35.

24. B. W. Johnson's People's New Testament, John 10:34-36.

25. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, Vol. 3, p. 187.

26. Fairbairn’s Imperial Standard Bible Encyclopedia, p. 24, vol. III, Zondervan, 1957 reprint.

27. Theological Dictionary, Rahner and Vorgrimler, p. 20, Herder and Herder, 1965.

28. Pastor Jon Courson, The Gospel According to John.

29. Vincent’s New Testament Word Studies, John 10:36.

30. C. J. Ellicott, John 10:34, Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers.

(Also John 10:34, 35 - CEV: TEV; GodsWord; The Message; NLT; NIRV; David Guzik - http://www.blbclassic.org/commentaries/ ... topic=John )

And the earliest Christians like the highly respected NT scholar Origen (see DEF note #1) and others - - including Tertullian; Justin Martyr; Hippolytus; Clement of Alexandria; Theophilus (p. 9, DEF); the writer of “The Epistle to Diognetus”; and even super-trinitarians Athanasius and St. Augustine - - also had this understanding for “a god.” And, as we saw above, many highly respected NT scholars of this century agree.

You posted reference texts, can't you post those text itself for ready reference?
I just wonder why Arians just alter one verse, John 1:1c as "a god" where next verses of same chapter does not have an "a" like; 2,6,12,13 and specially verse 18 below;

John 1:18
18 No man has seen God at any time; God the only Son, who is in the arms of the Father, He has explained Him.
NASB

The rule for the addition of "a" has been explained many times. It's useless to keep going over it and it's too bad that you don't understand what it means to translate the Greek into English.

Now, there are at least 16 to 30 versions of the Bible (that have been posted on this thread) that say "the only begotten SON," not the only begotten God. John 1:18 is not a good verse for you to prove Jesus is God. Manuscripts differ. The newer ones are more likely to take liberties with the verses, in many cases.

Why based heavily on translation? Can't we go to original language Greek? Translation inherently involves interpretation, you will be interpreting which was already interpreted, especially paraphrase translation that changed Bible words. https://www.google.com/search?q=do+tran ... e&ie=UTF-8

Westcott and Hort's The New Testament in the Original Greek rendered John 1:1c as "and God was the word."
Note: it is not a translation it is original Greek of the New Testament. The pioneers of modern textual criticism,
they developed a new approach to determining the original text of the New Testament by examining various Greek manuscripts. Methodological approach, they used internal and external criteria to evaluate manuscript readings, including the age of the manuscript, its linguistic style, and its relation to other manuscript. See original Greek below;

Jhn 1:1 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    λογος G3056 N-NSM 

Jesus as the only-begotten God in John 1:18 was supported by the original wordings of the oldest papyrus, the papyrus 66, the manuscript contains John 1:1–6:11, 6:35b–14:26, 29–30; 15:2–26; 16:2–4, 6–7; 16:10–20:20, 22–23; 20:25–21:9, 12, 17. It is one of the oldest well-preserved New Testament manuscripts known to exist.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_6 ... 20remained.

Followed by papyrus 75, is an early Greek New Testament manuscript written on papyrus containing text from the Gospel of Luke 3:18–24:53, and John 1:1–15:8.1  It is generally described as "the most significant" papyrus of the New Testament to be discovered so far. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_75

Yes, there are various reading about "Son" but those manuscripts were not the oldest.

Well, then, what do those manuscripts actually say about John 1:1c and John 1:18?

Not the oldest means, might be prone to copyist mistakes.
It was labelled various reading but the P66 and P75 were labelled original wordings.