“How does ‘the Word was a god’ fit with the Bible’s teaching that there is only one God?”

[FreeInChrist]

I would like to ask Jehovah’s Witness readers to think carefully and honestly about the theological implications of the New World Translation at John 1:1.

The NWT says, “the Word was a god,” while also saying “the Word was with God.” If both statements are taken at face value, this seems to describe two divine beings existing together in the beginning .... one who is called “God,” and another who is called “a god.” But Scripture repeatedly insists there is only one God. Isaiah 43:10 says, “Before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.” Isaiah 45:5 says, “There is no God besides me.” The Bible does not leave room for secondary or lesser gods.

So how can the Word be “a god” without introducing more than one true divine being?

If the Word is truly “a god,” then this appears to move away from biblical monotheism toward multiple divine beings. But if there is only one true God, then calling the Word “a god” creates a category the Bible itself never allows. In Scripture, there are not ranks or classes of deity .....there is only the one eternal Creator.

This is why many have understood John’s wording differently. The Greek construction describes nature or essence, not “a separate god.” In other words, John is not teaching that the Word is another god alongside Jehovah, but that the Word shares the very nature of God while remaining personally distinct.

So the question becomes: does “a god” actually protect monotheism .....or does it unintentionally undermine it?

I encourage everyone to examine whether this translation truly reflects the Bible’s consistent teaching that there is only one God.

 

[Keiw1]

I would like to ask Jehovah’s Witness readers to think carefully and honestly about the theological implications of the New World Translation at John 1:1.

The NWT says, “the Word was a god,” while also saying “the Word was with God.” If both statements are taken at face value, this seems to describe two divine beings existing together in the beginning .... one who is called “God,” and another who is called “a god.” But Scripture repeatedly insists there is only one God. Isaiah 43:10 says, “Before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.” Isaiah 45:5 says, “There is no God besides me.” The Bible does not leave room for secondary or lesser gods.

So how can the Word be “a god” without introducing more than one true divine being?

If the Word is truly “a god,” then this appears to move away from biblical monotheism toward multiple divine beings. But if there is only one true God, then calling the Word “a god” creates a category the Bible itself never allows. In Scripture, there are not ranks or classes of deity .....there is only the one eternal Creator.

This is why many have understood John’s wording differently. The Greek construction describes nature or essence, not “a separate god.” In other words, John is not teaching that the Word is another god alongside Jehovah, but that the Word shares the very nature of God while remaining personally distinct.

So the question becomes: does “a god” actually protect monotheism .....or does it unintentionally undermine it?

I encourage everyone to examine whether this translation truly reflects the Bible’s consistent teaching that there is only one God.

Small g god never means God, it means has godlike qualities, it is not calling that one God. The same exact Greek word given to satan at 2 Cor 4:4 is given to the Word at John 1:1, while the true God at both spots is given a different Greek word= God, thus god is the other for both. There is no translating rule to translate the Greek word 2 different ways like found in error filled translations- a god is correct to the Word. As well If the Word was God-Then the second line actually reads-And God( Word) was with God= that is more than 1 God.
Other Greek Scholars has a god at John 1:1-3 had was divine, 1 had was godlike. All rejected by trinity religions because truth exposes them.
The ones who do not bother to check-FACTS- hold life everlasting with little value. Because a blind guide assurred them-you are saved, or born again, or will get Grace free or salvation.
Here are undeniable facts of history-In 325 at the council of Nicea, they added Jesus to a 2 headed God, Not until 381 ce at the council of Constantinople they added the holy spirit and created a non existent trinity.= Recorded history facts. No trinity was served prior to 381 ce.( except in pagan religions)

 

[FreeInChrist]

Small g god never means God, it means has godlike qualities, it is not calling that one God.

Wrong as usual. First... I never said that a god was God. I said a god was a lesser god=polytheism.

And that is fine if that is your personal belief.... but it is not a Christian belief.... Lets looks at the following.
Search Assist
In the New World Translation, John 1:1 refers to "the Word" as "a god," which reflects the belief of Jehovah's Witnesses that Jesus is a lesser divine being, not the same as the one true God. This interpretation is distinct from traditional Christian views, which affirm that Jesus is fully divine and part of the Trinity, and does not align with pagan concepts of gods.

Further.....

“The idea that ‘small g god’ just means ‘godlike qualities’ isn’t what the Greek text says. In John 1:1, the phrase is kai theos ēn ho logos. Greek doesn’t have an indefinite article (‘a’). So inserting ‘a god’ is a translation choice, not something demanded by the grammar.

“John is not saying the Word was ‘a god’ or merely godlike. He is identifying the Word as God as to His nature, while distinguishing Him from the Father.”

“In John 1:3, it says all things came into existence through him. If Jesus is a created being, then he would have had to create himself — because John says not even one thing came into existence apart from him.”

“If John meant ‘godlike,’ he had the Greek word theios available ... but he didn’t use it. He used theos.”

“In John 20:28, Thomas calls Jesus ‘My Lord and my God.’ Jesus doesn’t correct him. If calling Jesus ‘God’ were wrong, that would have been the perfect moment to fix it.”

Finally, if you are still reading....

Was Jesus God or simply a god?

evidenceunseen.com

Claim:​

The translators of the Jehovah’s Witness Bible (the New World Translation, or NWT) render this verse as follows: “The Word was a god.” These translators argue that there is no article before theos (God). Therefore, they argue, this verse does not support the fact that Jesus is divine. Instead, this passage is describing that Jesus is godlike, but not God. Is this the case?

Response:​

his debated Greek text reads as follows:

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος
First, if John was trying to communicate that Jesus was godlike, he had a word at his disposal. Carson writes, “There is a perfectly serviceable word in Greek for ‘divine’ (namely theios).” But John didn’t use this word; he intentionally used theos instead.

Second, there are other places in the NT where the predicate nominative has no article, but the NWT translates the predicate nominative as definite—not indefinite. This shows terrible inconsistency on behalf of the NWT. R.H. Countess writes,

In the New Testament there are 282 occurrences of the anarthrous [or lack of the article] θεός. At sixteen places NWT has either a god, god, gods, or godly. Sixteen out of 282 means that the translators were faithful to their translation principle only six percent of the time… The first section of John-1:1–18—furnishes a lucid example of NWT arbitrary dogmatism. Θεός occurs eight times-verses 1, 2, 6, 12, 13, 18—and has the article only twice-verses 1, 2. Yet NWT six times translated “God,” once “a god,” and once “the god.”

If we followed this translation rule consistently, we would need to translate all of these passages in this way (because all of these lack the article in front of them):

John 1:1 as “a beginning,” rather than “the beginning.”

John 1:4 as “a life,” rather than simply “life.”

John 1:6 as “there came a man sent from a god.”

John 1:18 as “No one has seen a god at any time.”
Carson adds, “Even in this chapter, ‘you are the King of Israel’ (1:49) has no article before ‘King’ in the original (cf. also Jn. 8:39; 17:17; Rom. 14:17; Gal. 4:25; Rev. 1:20).”

Third, John most likely wrote it this way to show the diversity in the Godhead. He wanted to be clear that Jesus was God (in nature), but he was a separate person from God (in person). This grammatical construction brilliantly shows the unity of God (Jesus is God), while also preserving the diversity of God (Jesus is not the Father). Carson notes, “The effect of ordering the words this way is to emphasize ‘God’, as if John were saying, ‘and the word was God!’ In fact, if John had included the article, he would have been saying something quite untrue. He would have been so identifying the Word with God that no divine being could exist apart from the Word.” Greek expert Daniel Wallace writes,

Such an option does not at all impugn the deity of Christ. Rather, it stresses that, although the person of Christ is not the person of the Father, their essence is identical. Possible translations are as follows: “What God was, the Word was” (NEB), or “the Word was divine” (a modified Moffatt). In this second translation, “divine” is acceptable only if it is a term that can be applied only to true deity. However, in modern English, we use it with reference to angels, theologians, even a meal! Thus “divine” could be misleading in an English translation. The idea of a qualitative θεός here is that the Word had all the attributes and qualities that “the God” (of 1:1b) had. In other words, he shared the essence of the Father, though they differed in person. The construction the evangelist chose to express this idea was the most concise way he could have stated that the Word was God and yet was distinct from the Father.

Fourth, elsewhere, John uses the definite article to refer to Christ. If Jehovah’s witnesses are hanging their case on this weak grammatical argument, they will find themselves in trouble when we get to 20:28. Here, John uses the definite article to refer to Christ (ho theos), when he exclaims, “My Lord and my God!” Jehovah’s Witnesses dodge this biblical assertion of Jesus’ deity by arguing that this is similar to someone winning a car on The Price is Right and exclaiming, “Oh my God! Oh my God! Oh my God!” However, Jesus’ clear affirmation of Thomas’ belief surely invalidates this completely bizarre interpretation (20:29).

It shouldn’t surprise us that Greek grammarians have viciously criticized the translators of the New World Translation for their poor scholarship. Cult expert Ron Rhodes writes,

Dr. Julius Mantey, author of A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, calls the New World Translation ‘a shocking mistranslation.’ Dr. Bruce M. Metzger, professor of New Testament at Princeton University, calls it ‘a frightful mistranslation,’ ‘erroneous,’ ‘pernicious,’ and ‘reprehensible.’ Dr. William Barclay concluded that ‘the deliberate distortion of truth by this sect is seen in their New Testament translation…. It is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest.’

Due to these vicious critiques by NT scholars, the Watchtower has always protected the identity of its translators. They argue that they hide the identity of the translators in order to be humble and give the glory to God. Suspiciously, however, this anonymity has made it difficult to check the credentials of their “scholarly” translators.

When Raymond Franz was disfellowshiped from the Jehovah’s Witnesses, he gave up the names of the translators: Nathan Knorr, Frederick Franz, Albert Schroeder, George Gangas, and Milton Henschel. Rhodes writes, “It quickly became apparent that the committee was completely unqualified for the task. Four of the five men in the committee had no Hebrew or Greek. The fifth—Frederick Franz—claimed to know Hebrew and Greek, but upon examination under oath in court of law in Edinburgh, Scotland, was found to fail a simple Hebrew test.”

 

[Keiw1]

Wrong as usual. First... I never said that a god was God. I said a god was a lesser god=polytheism.

And that is fine if that is your personal belief.... but it is not a Christian belief.... Lets looks at the following.
Search Assist
In the New World Translation, John 1:1 refers to "the Word" as "a god," which reflects the belief of Jehovah's Witnesses that Jesus is a lesser divine being, not the same as the one true God. This interpretation is distinct from traditional Christian views, which affirm that Jesus is fully divine and part of the Trinity, and does not align with pagan concepts of gods.

Further.....

“The idea that ‘small g god’ just means ‘godlike qualities’ isn’t what the Greek text says. In John 1:1, the phrase is kai theos ēn ho logos. Greek doesn’t have an indefinite article (‘a’). So inserting ‘a god’ is a translation choice, not something demanded by the grammar.

“John is not saying the Word was ‘a god’ or merely godlike. He is identifying the Word as God as to His nature, while distinguishing Him from the Father.”

“In John 1:3, it says all things came into existence through him. If Jesus is a created being, then he would have had to create himself — because John says not even one thing came into existence apart from him.”

“If John meant ‘godlike,’ he had the Greek word theios available ... but he didn’t use it. He used theos.”

“In John 20:28, Thomas calls Jesus ‘My Lord and my God.’ Jesus doesn’t correct him. If calling Jesus ‘God’ were wrong, that would have been the perfect moment to fix it.”

Finally, if you are still reading....

Was Jesus God or simply a god?

evidenceunseen.com

Claim:​

The translators of the Jehovah’s Witness Bible (the New World Translation, or NWT) render this verse as follows: “The Word was a god.” These translators argue that there is no article before theos (God). Therefore, they argue, this verse does not support the fact that Jesus is divine. Instead, this passage is describing that Jesus is godlike, but not God. Is this the case?

Response:​

his debated Greek text reads as follows:

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος
First, if John was trying to communicate that Jesus was godlike, he had a word at his disposal. Carson writes, “There is a perfectly serviceable word in Greek for ‘divine’ (namely theios).” But John didn’t use this word; he intentionally used theos instead.

Second, there are other places in the NT where the predicate nominative has no article, but the NWT translates the predicate nominative as definite—not indefinite. This shows terrible inconsistency on behalf of the NWT. R.H. Countess writes,


If we followed this translation rule consistently, we would need to translate all of these passages in this way (because all of these lack the article in front of them):

John 1:1 as “a beginning,” rather than “the beginning.”

John 1:4 as “a life,” rather than simply “life.”

John 1:6 as “there came a man sent from a god.”

John 1:18 as “No one has seen a god at any time.”
Carson adds, “Even in this chapter, ‘you are the King of Israel’ (1:49) has no article before ‘King’ in the original (cf. also Jn. 8:39; 17:17; Rom. 14:17; Gal. 4:25; Rev. 1:20).”

Third, John most likely wrote it this way to show the diversity in the Godhead. He wanted to be clear that Jesus was God (in nature), but he was a separate person from God (in person). This grammatical construction brilliantly shows the unity of God (Jesus is God), while also preserving the diversity of God (Jesus is not the Father). Carson notes, “The effect of ordering the words this way is to emphasize ‘God’, as if John were saying, ‘and the word was God!’ In fact, if John had included the article, he would have been saying something quite untrue. He would have been so identifying the Word with God that no divine being could exist apart from the Word.” Greek expert Daniel Wallace writes,


Fourth, elsewhere, John uses the definite article to refer to Christ. If Jehovah’s witnesses are hanging their case on this weak grammatical argument, they will find themselves in trouble when we get to 20:28. Here, John uses the definite article to refer to Christ (ho theos), when he exclaims, “My Lord and my God!” Jehovah’s Witnesses dodge this biblical assertion of Jesus’ deity by arguing that this is similar to someone winning a car on The Price is Right and exclaiming, “Oh my God! Oh my God! Oh my God!” However, Jesus’ clear affirmation of Thomas’ belief surely invalidates this completely bizarre interpretation (20:29).

It shouldn’t surprise us that Greek grammarians have viciously criticized the translators of the New World Translation for their poor scholarship. Cult expert Ron Rhodes writes,


Due to these vicious critiques by NT scholars, the Watchtower has always protected the identity of its translators. They argue that they hide the identity of the translators in order to be humble and give the glory to God. Suspiciously, however, this anonymity has made it difficult to check the credentials of their “scholarly” translators.

When Raymond Franz was disfellowshiped from the Jehovah’s Witnesses, he gave up the names of the translators: Nathan Knorr, Frederick Franz, Albert Schroeder, George Gangas, and Milton Henschel. Rhodes writes, “It quickly became apparent that the committee was completely unqualified for the task. Four of the five men in the committee had no Hebrew or Greek. The fifth—Frederick Franz—claimed to know Hebrew and Greek, but upon examination under oath in court of law in Edinburgh, Scotland, was found to fail a simple Hebrew test.”

I am 100% correct sir--Satan is called god--is he a God or a fallen angel who has godlike qualities?
Again you are wrong Mr Raymond Franz was a hate filled apostate. Not unlike the pharisees in Jesus day. Fact-God fixed his translation through The JW,s. the same as God wrote the books of his bible through righteous men. Via holy spirit guidance.
You quote schgolars who live in darkness who belong to religionsssssssssssssssss that are a house divided they will not stand, they are divided because they lack holy spirit.

 

[FreeInChrist]

I am 100% correct sir--Satan is called god--is he a God or a fallen angel who has godlike qualities?

2 Cor 4:4 in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

The fallen Angel Lucifer is called god of this world. He believed he was God and tried to be like him.

Lets not liken the Word to a god of the same caliber. Now your Mormon brothers say that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers in the sense that both are spirit children of God the Father ... Is this why for the small g to indicate both? Polytheism is growing.....

As you can see in 2Cor 4:4 Satan has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ,

Why did he have to do that when the reprobate would already have been blinded?

Or was it that his blinding the is what removed them from God mind?

 

[Keiw1]

2 Cor 4:4 in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

The fallen Angel Lucifer is called god of this world. He believed he was God and tried to be like him.

Lets not liken the Word to a god of the same caliber. Now your Mormon brothers say that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers in the sense that both are spirit children of God the Father ... Is this why for the small g to indicate both? Polytheism is growing.....

As you can see in 2Cor 4:4 Satan has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ,

Why did he have to do that when the reprobate would already have been blinded?

Or was it that his blinding the is what removed them from God mind?

But the fact remains he is not God as you twist it into by him being called god small g. Another proof one called god is not God=the second line at John 1:1 in error translations In simple English reads-And God( Word) was with God-2 capitol G Gods makes more than 1 God that there is in Reality.. Your translations mislead all to destruction. Altered and error filled by satans will.

 

[FreeInChrist]

But the fact remains he is not God as you twist it into by him being called god small g. Another proof one called god is not God=the second line at John 1:1 in error translations In simple English reads-And God( Word) was with God-2 capitol G Gods makes more than 1 God that there is in Reality.. Your translations mislead all to destruction. Altered and error filled by satans will.

That is not me...... This is me.

Satan attacked the Greek? the Aramaic? and the Septuagint......? ( the LXX, or Septuagint, is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, specifically written in Koine Greek. It was created to make the scriptures accessible to Greek-speaking Jews) and not least The Complete Jewish Bible.

The only thing filled by satan's will was . Frederick W. Franz, in 1950 when satan knew that time is running out and he was desperate to stop the truth before he no longer can....

One translation that cannot stop the following... The following which are not tied to the RCC. It was the RCC who copied the truth from the histories...

Biblically it says satan is god of this world. The heavenly Father granted this to him as he was so desperate to be as God... So desperate to excel above God the Father, then known as YHWH ( Yahweh )
but knowing the signs that Jesus talked of satan knows when the end is approaching and he made another effort to destroy mankind and drag him to the pits with him....

By the NWT if the Word was not God, and he was just a god.... that is polytheism in our very lifetimes but satan has blinded many to this truth....

This card carrying Trinitarian can assure you that my faith, belief, and allegiance is only with God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.... the three persons that make up the Godhead.... IOW God.

If you can read the following, at least do a light scan before you counter what they say. If not, perhaps someone can tell you what they say and explain it to you

In the beginning was the Word , and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The was the Koine Greek and the Aramaic Peshitta says

ܒܪܫܝܬ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܡܠܬܐ ܘܗܘ ܡܠܬܐ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܠܘܬ ܐܠܗܐ ܘܐܠܗܐ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܗܘ ܡܠܬܐ
1 In the beginning there was The Miltha {The Word}, and He, The Miltha {The Word}, was with Alaha {God}. And Alaha {God} Himself was The Miltha {The Word}.

ܗܢܐ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܒܪܫܝܬ ܠܘܬ ܐܠܗܐ
2 This One was existing in the beginning with Alaha {God}.

Aramaic Bible in plain English

1In the origin The Word had been existing and That Word had been existing with God and That Word was himself God. 2This One himself was at the origin with God.

THE COMPLETE ETHIOPIAN BIBLE in English 88 Scriptures

The Good News According to John11 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Wordwas God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God.

LXX Septuagint
1:1In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God.

1:2This one was in the beginning with God.

The Complete Jewish Bible

1 In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
2 He was with God in the beginning.

NOTHING I READ AND THERE ARE DOZENS MORE HAS THE WORD STATED TO BE a god.

oNLY THE nwt LEANS POLYTHEISM......

 

[Keiw1]

That is not me...... This is me.

Satan attacked the Greek? the Aramaic? and the Septuagint......? ( the LXX, or Septuagint, is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, specifically written in Koine Greek. It was created to make the scriptures accessible to Greek-speaking Jews) and not least The Complete Jewish Bible.

The only thing filled by satan's will was . Frederick W. Franz, in 1950 when satan knew that time is running out and he was desperate to stop the truth before he no longer can....

One translation that cannot stop the following... The following which are not tied to the RCC. It was the RCC who copied the truth from the histories...

Biblically it says satan is god of this world. The heavenly Father granted this to him as he was so desperate to be as God... So desperate to excel above God the Father, then known as YHWH ( Yahweh )
but knowing the signs that Jesus talked of satan knows when the end is approaching and he made another effort to destroy mankind and drag him to the pits with him....

By the NWT if the Word was not God, and he was just a god.... that is polytheism in our very lifetimes but satan has blinded many to this truth....

This card carrying Trinitarian can assure you that my faith, belief, and allegiance is only with God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.... the three persons that make up the Godhead.... IOW God.

If you can read the following, at least do a light scan before you counter what they say. If not, perhaps someone can tell you what they say and explain it to you

In the beginning was the Word , and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The was the Koine Greek and the Aramaic Peshitta says

ܒܪܫܝܬ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܡܠܬܐ ܘܗܘ ܡܠܬܐ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܠܘܬ ܐܠܗܐ ܘܐܠܗܐ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܗܘ ܡܠܬܐ
1 In the beginning there was The Miltha {The Word}, and He, The Miltha {The Word}, was with Alaha {God}. And Alaha {God} Himself was The Miltha {The Word}.

ܗܢܐ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܒܪܫܝܬ ܠܘܬ ܐܠܗܐ
2 This One was existing in the beginning with Alaha {God}.

Aramaic Bible in plain English

1In the origin The Word had been existing and That Word had been existing with God and That Word was himself God. 2This One himself was at the origin with God.

THE COMPLETE ETHIOPIAN BIBLE in English 88 Scriptures

The Good News According to John11 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Wordwas God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God.

LXX Septuagint
1:1In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God.

1:2This one was in the beginning with God.

The Complete Jewish Bible

1 In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
2 He was with God in the beginning.

NOTHING I READ AND THERE ARE DOZENS MORE HAS THE WORD STATED TO BE a god.

oNLY THE nwt LEANS POLYTHEISM......

Yes satan attacked through Catholicism translating. Only a few minor fragments were left older than Catholicism translating when the protestants translated the Greek works and all bibles with Gods name removed against his will-to mislead. Over 7000 spots Jesus' Father put his name-Why? Because he wants it there, thus Jesus wants it there, Thus his real religion wants it there as do the true followers. Thus all religions using the altered translations are giving support to satans will over Jesus' Fathers will-And in light of Matt 7:21--they will not enter Gods kingdom.

 

[FreeInChrist]

Yes satan attacked through Catholicism translating. Only a few minor fragments were left older than Catholicism translating when the protestants translated the Greek works and all bibles with Gods name removed against his will-to mislead. Over 7000 spots Jesus' Father put his name-Why? Because he wants it there, thus Jesus wants it there, Thus his real religion wants it there as do the true followers. Thus all religions using the altered translations are giving support to satans will over Jesus' Fathers will-And in light of Matt 7:21--they will not enter Gods kingdom.

Satan was sure busy. Just look at these scriptural verse changes that have been made...

Misleading Revisions in the New World Translation

www.gospeloutreach.net

[td width="100%"]
Misleading Revisions in the
New World Translation

by Andy Bjorklund

[/td]
[td width="100%"]


[/td]​

[td width="100%"]

The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society (WTBTS) has inserted numerous changes into a proper translation of the Bible in an effort to validate the non-Christian doctrines of the Jehovah's Witnesses (JWs). Consequently, they claim that their New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (NWT) is superior to all others.


In the examples below, the New International Version of the Holy Bible (New York International Bible Society, c. 1978) has been used to depict a correct translation in the first quotation. (The translators' choice of words is further verified by highly similar renditions in the King James Version, Revised Standard Version and New American Standard Bible.)
The second quotation in each example is derived from a post-1989 edition of the NWT (WTBTS of Pennsylvania and International Bible Students Association, c. 1984). References to actual Hebrew and Greek words are derived from Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (Thomas Nelson, c. 1990), the Greek-English New Testament (Christianity Today, c. 1975) and Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (McDonald, unabridged ed., n.d.)
Genesis 1:2
"Spirit of God" changed to "God's active force."
The revision modifies the original noun with a more impersonal form as the JWs reject the orthodox Christian belief in the personality of the Holy Spirit.
Exodus 3:14
"I am" changed to "I shall prove to be."
The revision clouds the connection between God's self proclaimed title and Jesus' proclamation of being the same in John 8:58, as the JW rejects the deity of Jesus.
Numbers 1:52
"Under his own standard" changed to "by his [three-tribe] division."
The Hebrew word degal translated as "standard" literally means flag or banner. Since the JWs regard saluting a flag as an act of idolatry, the text has been altered according to their doctrinal bias. (Same revision found in Num. 2:2, 3, 10, 18, 25; 10: 14, 18, 22, 25.)
Isaiah 43:10
"Nor will there be one after me" changed to "after me there continued to be none."
The original future tense of the verb indicates that there will never be another being sharing in God's divinity. The altered tense suggests credibility to the JW doctrine of Jesus' becoming a "mighty god" while still being less than Jehovah in nature. (See the John 1: I discussion below for another expression of this JW distortion.)
Ecclesiastes 12:7
"The spirit returns" changed to "the spirit itself returns."
The passage indicates the return of a human spirit to God after death. Since the JWs believe in an unconscious state after death, "itself' has been inserted to suggest a more impersonal reference to spirit.
Matthew 2:11
"Bowed down and worshipped him" changed to "did obeisance to it"
The JWs evade recognizing Jesus as worthy of worship as a divine being by altering the form of honor that he receives from men and angels. The Greek word proskuneo literally means "worship." The use of "obeisance" is a NWT adaptation. (Same revision found in Matthew 8:2, 9:18, 14:33, 15:25, 28:9, 17; Mark 5:6, 15:19; Luke 24:52; John 9:38; Hebrews 1:6.)
Matthew 5:19
"Least in the kingdom of heaven" changed to "least in relation to the kingdom of the heaven."
The passage indicates that a disobedient believer who sins can still find forgiveness and eternal life. The JWs believe heaven is reserved for only 144,000 specially designated servants of God. The revision suggests more separation between these groups through a status hierarchy.
Matthew 25:46
"Eternal punishment" changed to "everlasting cutting-off."
The Greek word kolasis translated "punishment" indicates continuous torment, but the NWT revision suggests "termination," as the JWs promote the doctrine of annihilationism regarding condemned souls.
Mark 1:4
"Baptism of repentance" changed to "baptism [in symbol] of repentance. "
Nothing in the original Greek text justifies the insertion of "in symbol." The revision undermines the significance of John the Baptist's ministry, the Jewish meaning of baptism and the Christian sacrament of baptism in contrast to the more regimented JW baptism requirements.
Luke 12:8
"Acknowledges me" changed to "confesses union with me."
The addition of "union" suggest something more than what the original Greek actually states and adds further credibility to the NWT distortion presented in John 6:56 below.
Luke 23:43
'Today you will be with me" changed to "I tell you today, You will be with me."
Jesus assured the thief on the cross that their spirits would soon enter the spiritual/heavenly realm together. As the JWs reject the belief in the conscious survival of the human spirit after death, their revision suggests that "today" deals with the time of the statement rather than the relocation of their spirits.
John 1:1
"Word was God" changed to "Word was a god."
The JWs reject the orthodox Christian belief in the deity of Jesus. The revision asserts that Jesus was someone other than God Himself.
John 1:12
"Believe" changed to "exercise faith."
The orthodox Christian doctrine of spiritual justification and rebirth before God by belief in Jesus is in conflict with the JW doctrine of salvation by works (i.e., obedience to their organization). The revision attempts to describe salvation as a continuous process rather than a radical encounter and transition (Same revision found in John 3:16, 18, 6:29; Romans 4:3, 10:4, 9, 10.)
John 6:56
"Remains in me" changed to "remains in union with me."
The mystical union between the individual human spirit and the Spirit of Jesus is obscured by restructuring "in" with a compound form. The substitution implies more separation between a Christian and Jesus. (Same revision found in John 14:20; Romans 8:1-2, 10, 12:5; 2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 3:28; Ephesians 1:13*; 2:10, 13, 15, 21, 22; 3:6; Colossians 1:14*, 16*, 27, 2:6, 10*, 11, 12*, 3:3; 1 Thessalonians 4:16, 5:18; 1 John 3:24, 4:4, 5:20. Verses with an asterisk (*) indicate where the revision uses "by means of" or "in relationship to" rather than "in union with.")
John 8:58
"I am" changed to "I have been."
Same intent as described in Exodus 3:14 above.
John 14:17
"Beholds him or knows him" changed to "beholds it or knows it."
The revision ignores the context of the pronoun with the Comforter role in the preceding verse to deny the personality of the Holy Spirit.
John 17:5
"Glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you" changed to "glorify me alongside yourself with the glory that I had alongside you."
The original text reflects the shared deity of God the Father and Jesus before the creation of the world, but the revision suggests different natures as implied by different states of glory.
John 17:21
"Are in me" changed to "are in union with me."
The original statement by Jesus indicates his shared deity with the Father. The revision undermines this by suggesting a greater separation between them.

Acts 2:17
"Pour out my Spirit" changed to "pour out some of my spirit."
The revision evades recognition of the Holy Spirit and His activity at Pentecost by suggesting an impersonal force activated to a more limited degree by God.
Acts 2:42
"Breaking of bread" changed to "taking of meals."
The passage demonstrates the frequency of the communion sacrament among the earliest Christians. The revision is an attempt to disguise this practice as the JWs teach that communion is reserved for only the 144,000 special saints. (Same revision found in Acts 20:7.)
Acts 4:12
"Be saved" changed to "get saved." The revision avoids recognizing that an individual commitment to Jesus provides immediate and complete salvation, as the JWs believe in an alternative salvation as prescribed by their organization. (Same revision found in Acts 16:30-31.)
Acts 10:36
"Lord of all" changed to "Lord of all [others]."
The revision suggests that even though Jesus is highly honored, he is still one among many of God's created beings. (Similar revisions found in Romans 8:32; Philippians 2:9; Colossians 1:16-17.)
Romans 2:29
"By the Spirit" changed to "by spirit."
Although the definite article 'the" does not literally appear in the Greek, it is implied by the form that (pneuma) appears in. The revision, however, translates pneuma in a more abstract form to evade the reality of the Holy Spirit. (Same revision found in Romans 15:19; Ephesians 2:22; 3:5; Titus 3:5; James 2:26; 2 Peter 1:21.)
Romans 8:23a
"Have the firstfruits of the Spirit" changed to "have the firstfruits, namely the spirit."
This represents another form of disguising the separate personality of the Holy Spirit as in Romans 2:29 above. The original text refers to the derivatives of the Spirit, but the revision identifies the spirit as a derivative.
Romans 8:23b
"The redemption of our bodies" changed to "the release from our bodies by ransom."
This revision avoids the suggestion that there is continuity of either body or soul after death. Their teaching that the soul ceases to exist at the death of the body precludes the ownership of, or relationship to, a body that must be redeemed.
Romans 8:28
"All things" changed to "all his works." The revision undermines the sovereignty of God by suggesting that He controls only the things He is directly involved in doing.
Romans 8:29
"Those God foreknew" changed to "those whom he gave his first recognition."
The revision obscures the nature of God's knowledge and power as a first recognition may or may not be foreknowledge.
Romans 9:5
"Christ, who is God over all, forever praised!" changed to "Christ, [sprang] according to the flesh: God who is over all, [be] blessed forever."
The direction proclamation that Christ is God is obscured by the altered text.
Romans 10:13
"Lord" changed to "Jehovah."
This revision obscures the fact that the Lord referred to in verse 13 is the same Lord called Jesus in verse 9. Since the JWs reject the deity of Jesus, the revision is made accordingly.
The Greek word, kurios, translated "Lord" has been revised to "Jehovah" over 200 times in the NWT. The JWs insist that this is the only valid title for God, even though Greek-speaking Jews used "Lord" and "God" in place of "Yahweh" (the source of "Jehovah") throughout their Septuagint translation of the Old Testament. Furthermore, the Bible contains dozens of names for God other than Lord, Yahweh, or Jehovah.
Romans 13:1
"Authorities that exist have been established by God" changed to "authorities stand placed in their relative positions by God."
Since the JW regard saluting a flag, military service and similar forms of submission to government as idolatry, they have added words to the text to weaken the proclaimed authority of government.
1 Corinthians 6:19
"Your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit" changed to "the body of YOU people is [the] temple of the holy spirit."
To avoid recognition of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the individual believer, the revision modifies "body" to a more collective form in harmony with the opposing JW doctrine.
1 Corinthians 10:4
"The Rock was Christ" changed to "that rock-mass meant the Christ."
The passage depicts the preincarnate Jesus exhibiting his divine nature by being present many centuries earlier. This revision tries to conceal his eternal nature with a more figurative interpretation of "the Rock."
1 Corinthians 12:11
"As he determines" changed to "as it wills."
The NWT finds many ways to disguise the personality of the Holy Spirit. In this case the third person pronoun exercising individual conscience and will is replaced with an impersonal pronoun.
1 Corinthians 14:14-16
"Spirit" changed to "[gift of the] spirit."
Like several other Biblical passages, this one indicates the distinctive presence of the human spirit as distinguished from the mind and body. The JWs evade these distinctions and try to disguise them with related revisions.
1 Corinthians 15:2
"By this gospel you are saved" changed to "through which YOU are also being saved."
Similar to the Acts 16:30 revision above, this one again obscures the completeness of salvation by grace. The JW's salvation exists as an extended process ("being saved") with the outcome being uncertain until final judgment before Jehovah.
Galatians 6:18
"Your spirit" changed to "the spirit YOU [show]."
Similar to the 1 Corinthians 14 revision above, this one attempts to obscure the reality of the individual human spirit by presenting it more as an attitude of action than an entity.
Philippians 1:23
"To depart and be with Christ" changed to "the releasing and the being with Christ."
Paul's eagerness indicates that the believer's spirit goes immediately into Christ's presence at death. The revision suggests that death and being with Christ are two separate steps in an extended process, as the JWs believe in soul sleep (i.e., the unconscious state of the human spirit awaiting the resurrection).
Colossians 1:19
"His fullness" changed to "fullness."
The definite Greek article (to), translated "his," indicates that Jesus shares the Father's divine nature as also shown in Colossians 2:9. The revisions evade the truth by concealing the similarity of the two passages.
Colossians 2:9
"The fullness of deity" changed to "the fullness of the divine quality."
The Greek theotes, translated "deity," literally means divine essence or divinity. As the JWs reject the divine nature of Jesus, a revision is inserted to suggest that Jesus is limited to only divine-like characteristics.
I Timothy 4:1
"The Spirit" changed to "the inspired utterance."
This revision attempts to obscure the reality and activity of the Holy Spirit by representing it as a message instead of an entity. (Similar revisions found in 1 John 4:1, 3, 6 with "expression" being utilized in place of "utterance.")
Titus 2:13
"Our great God and Savior Jesus Christ" changed to "the great God and of [the] Savior of us, Christ Jesus."
Similar to the Romans 9:5 revision shown above, a distinct proclamation of Jesus as God is obscured by the altered text. (Similar rewording also found in 2 Peter 1:1.)
Hebrews 1:8
"Your throne, 0 God" changed to "God is your throne."
The revision avoids addressing the Son, Jesus, as God to validate the JWs' rejection of his divine nature.
Hebrews 9:14
"The eternal Spirit" changed to "an everlasting spirit."
Similar to the Romans 2:29 revision above, the switching of the article before the adjective represents the work of the Holy Spirit in a more indirect/impersonal manner.
Hebrews 12:9
"Father of our spirits" changed to "Father of our spiritual life."
Similar to the 1 Corinthians 14 revision shown above, this one tries to obscure the distinctive reality of human spirits by replacing them with a more abstract noun.
Hebrews 12:23
"The spirits of righteous men" changed to "the spiritual lives of righteous ones."
This revision represents the same noun-switching as described in Hebrews 12:9 above.
Hebrews 12:28
"We are receiving a kingdom" changed to "we are to receive a kingdom."
An orthodox Christian understanding of the Kingdom recognizes it as primarily established through Jesus' victorious death, then further through post-resurrection displays of his power, and perpetually through the addition of new believers into God's family. The JWs teach that Jesus' Kingdom did not begin until his invisible return in 1914. The form of the Greek word for "receiving" (paralambano) implies a current condition, but the revision suggests a future event according to the JW doctrine.
1 Peter 1:11
"Spirit of Christ in them was pointing" changed to "the spirit in them was indicating concerning Christ."
Another example of the supernatural presence of Jesus in the life of a Christian is obscured again by this revision as the JW doctrinal view presents him as more limited.
1 Peter 3:18-19
"By the Spirit, through whom" changed to "in the spirit. In this [state]."
Similar to several examples presented above, in this passage the presence and personality of the Holy Spirit is obscured with a more abstract representation of the Holy Spirit to accommodate the JW doctrine.
Jude 19
"Have the Spirit" changed to "having spirituality."
Similar to Galatians 6:18 above, this revision attempts to obscure the separate presence of the Holy Spirit.
Revelation 3:14
"Ruler of God's creation" changed to "beginning of the creation by God."
The altered prepositions distract from the sovereignty of Jesus indicated in the passage and suggests that the real power of creation was accomplished through the Father, as the JWs believe that Jesus is a created being.
Author's Note


Approximately one-forth of the verse citations above were derived from The New World Translation on Trial by Robert Bowman in the Christian Research Journal, 11:3 (Winter/Spring, 1989), p.20. The rest of this inventory was compiled from the author's own comparisons of doctrinally critical verses with the references cited in the introduction. There are many more examples of Biblical distortions by the JWs than those presented here. This assortment is limited to the more detectable and doctrinally significant examples.​

[/td]

 

[Keiw1]

Satan was sure busy. Just look at these scriptural verse changes that have been made...

Misleading Revisions in the New World Translation

www.gospeloutreach.net

[td width="100%"]
Misleading Revisions in the
New World Translation

by Andy Bjorklund

[/td]
[td width="100%"]


[/td]​

[td width="100%"]

The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society (WTBTS) has inserted numerous changes into a proper translation of the Bible in an effort to validate the non-Christian doctrines of the Jehovah's Witnesses (JWs). Consequently, they claim that their New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (NWT) is superior to all others.


In the examples below, the New International Version of the Holy Bible (New York International Bible Society, c. 1978) has been used to depict a correct translation in the first quotation. (The translators' choice of words is further verified by highly similar renditions in the King James Version, Revised Standard Version and New American Standard Bible.)
The second quotation in each example is derived from a post-1989 edition of the NWT (WTBTS of Pennsylvania and International Bible Students Association, c. 1984). References to actual Hebrew and Greek words are derived from Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (Thomas Nelson, c. 1990), the Greek-English New Testament (Christianity Today, c. 1975) and Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (McDonald, unabridged ed., n.d.)
Genesis 1:2
"Spirit of God" changed to "God's active force."
The revision modifies the original noun with a more impersonal form as the JWs reject the orthodox Christian belief in the personality of the Holy Spirit.
Exodus 3:14
"I am" changed to "I shall prove to be."
The revision clouds the connection between God's self proclaimed title and Jesus' proclamation of being the same in John 8:58, as the JW rejects the deity of Jesus.
Numbers 1:52
"Under his own standard" changed to "by his [three-tribe] division."
The Hebrew word degal translated as "standard" literally means flag or banner. Since the JWs regard saluting a flag as an act of idolatry, the text has been altered according to their doctrinal bias. (Same revision found in Num. 2:2, 3, 10, 18, 25; 10: 14, 18, 22, 25.)
Isaiah 43:10
"Nor will there be one after me" changed to "after me there continued to be none."
The original future tense of the verb indicates that there will never be another being sharing in God's divinity. The altered tense suggests credibility to the JW doctrine of Jesus' becoming a "mighty god" while still being less than Jehovah in nature. (See the John 1: I discussion below for another expression of this JW distortion.)
Ecclesiastes 12:7
"The spirit returns" changed to "the spirit itself returns."
The passage indicates the return of a human spirit to God after death. Since the JWs believe in an unconscious state after death, "itself' has been inserted to suggest a more impersonal reference to spirit.
Matthew 2:11
"Bowed down and worshipped him" changed to "did obeisance to it"
The JWs evade recognizing Jesus as worthy of worship as a divine being by altering the form of honor that he receives from men and angels. The Greek word proskuneo literally means "worship." The use of "obeisance" is a NWT adaptation. (Same revision found in Matthew 8:2, 9:18, 14:33, 15:25, 28:9, 17; Mark 5:6, 15:19; Luke 24:52; John 9:38; Hebrews 1:6.)
Matthew 5:19
"Least in the kingdom of heaven" changed to "least in relation to the kingdom of the heaven."
The passage indicates that a disobedient believer who sins can still find forgiveness and eternal life. The JWs believe heaven is reserved for only 144,000 specially designated servants of God. The revision suggests more separation between these groups through a status hierarchy.
Matthew 25:46
"Eternal punishment" changed to "everlasting cutting-off."
The Greek word kolasis translated "punishment" indicates continuous torment, but the NWT revision suggests "termination," as the JWs promote the doctrine of annihilationism regarding condemned souls.
Mark 1:4
"Baptism of repentance" changed to "baptism [in symbol] of repentance. "
Nothing in the original Greek text justifies the insertion of "in symbol." The revision undermines the significance of John the Baptist's ministry, the Jewish meaning of baptism and the Christian sacrament of baptism in contrast to the more regimented JW baptism requirements.
Luke 12:8
"Acknowledges me" changed to "confesses union with me."
The addition of "union" suggest something more than what the original Greek actually states and adds further credibility to the NWT distortion presented in John 6:56 below.
Luke 23:43
'Today you will be with me" changed to "I tell you today, You will be with me."
Jesus assured the thief on the cross that their spirits would soon enter the spiritual/heavenly realm together. As the JWs reject the belief in the conscious survival of the human spirit after death, their revision suggests that "today" deals with the time of the statement rather than the relocation of their spirits.
John 1:1
"Word was God" changed to "Word was a god."
The JWs reject the orthodox Christian belief in the deity of Jesus. The revision asserts that Jesus was someone other than God Himself.
John 1:12
"Believe" changed to "exercise faith."
The orthodox Christian doctrine of spiritual justification and rebirth before God by belief in Jesus is in conflict with the JW doctrine of salvation by works (i.e., obedience to their organization). The revision attempts to describe salvation as a continuous process rather than a radical encounter and transition (Same revision found in John 3:16, 18, 6:29; Romans 4:3, 10:4, 9, 10.)
John 6:56
"Remains in me" changed to "remains in union with me."
The mystical union between the individual human spirit and the Spirit of Jesus is obscured by restructuring "in" with a compound form. The substitution implies more separation between a Christian and Jesus. (Same revision found in John 14:20; Romans 8:1-2, 10, 12:5; 2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 3:28; Ephesians 1:13*; 2:10, 13, 15, 21, 22; 3:6; Colossians 1:14*, 16*, 27, 2:6, 10*, 11, 12*, 3:3; 1 Thessalonians 4:16, 5:18; 1 John 3:24, 4:4, 5:20. Verses with an asterisk (*) indicate where the revision uses "by means of" or "in relationship to" rather than "in union with.")
John 8:58
"I am" changed to "I have been."
Same intent as described in Exodus 3:14 above.
John 14:17
"Beholds him or knows him" changed to "beholds it or knows it."
The revision ignores the context of the pronoun with the Comforter role in the preceding verse to deny the personality of the Holy Spirit.
John 17:5
"Glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you" changed to "glorify me alongside yourself with the glory that I had alongside you."
The original text reflects the shared deity of God the Father and Jesus before the creation of the world, but the revision suggests different natures as implied by different states of glory.
John 17:21
"Are in me" changed to "are in union with me."
The original statement by Jesus indicates his shared deity with the Father. The revision undermines this by suggesting a greater separation between them.

Acts 2:17
"Pour out my Spirit" changed to "pour out some of my spirit."
The revision evades recognition of the Holy Spirit and His activity at Pentecost by suggesting an impersonal force activated to a more limited degree by God.
Acts 2:42
"Breaking of bread" changed to "taking of meals."
The passage demonstrates the frequency of the communion sacrament among the earliest Christians. The revision is an attempt to disguise this practice as the JWs teach that communion is reserved for only the 144,000 special saints. (Same revision found in Acts 20:7.)
Acts 4:12
"Be saved" changed to "get saved." The revision avoids recognizing that an individual commitment to Jesus provides immediate and complete salvation, as the JWs believe in an alternative salvation as prescribed by their organization. (Same revision found in Acts 16:30-31.)
Acts 10:36
"Lord of all" changed to "Lord of all [others]."
The revision suggests that even though Jesus is highly honored, he is still one among many of God's created beings. (Similar revisions found in Romans 8:32; Philippians 2:9; Colossians 1:16-17.)
Romans 2:29
"By the Spirit" changed to "by spirit."
Although the definite article 'the" does not literally appear in the Greek, it is implied by the form that (pneuma) appears in. The revision, however, translates pneuma in a more abstract form to evade the reality of the Holy Spirit. (Same revision found in Romans 15:19; Ephesians 2:22; 3:5; Titus 3:5; James 2:26; 2 Peter 1:21.)
Romans 8:23a
"Have the firstfruits of the Spirit" changed to "have the firstfruits, namely the spirit."
This represents another form of disguising the separate personality of the Holy Spirit as in Romans 2:29 above. The original text refers to the derivatives of the Spirit, but the revision identifies the spirit as a derivative.
Romans 8:23b
"The redemption of our bodies" changed to "the release from our bodies by ransom."
This revision avoids the suggestion that there is continuity of either body or soul after death. Their teaching that the soul ceases to exist at the death of the body precludes the ownership of, or relationship to, a body that must be redeemed.
Romans 8:28
"All things" changed to "all his works." The revision undermines the sovereignty of God by suggesting that He controls only the things He is directly involved in doing.
Romans 8:29
"Those God foreknew" changed to "those whom he gave his first recognition."
The revision obscures the nature of God's knowledge and power as a first recognition may or may not be foreknowledge.
Romans 9:5
"Christ, who is God over all, forever praised!" changed to "Christ, [sprang] according to the flesh: God who is over all, [be] blessed forever."
The direction proclamation that Christ is God is obscured by the altered text.
Romans 10:13
"Lord" changed to "Jehovah."
This revision obscures the fact that the Lord referred to in verse 13 is the same Lord called Jesus in verse 9. Since the JWs reject the deity of Jesus, the revision is made accordingly.
The Greek word, kurios, translated "Lord" has been revised to "Jehovah" over 200 times in the NWT. The JWs insist that this is the only valid title for God, even though Greek-speaking Jews used "Lord" and "God" in place of "Yahweh" (the source of "Jehovah") throughout their Septuagint translation of the Old Testament. Furthermore, the Bible contains dozens of names for God other than Lord, Yahweh, or Jehovah.
Romans 13:1
"Authorities that exist have been established by God" changed to "authorities stand placed in their relative positions by God."
Since the JW regard saluting a flag, military service and similar forms of submission to government as idolatry, they have added words to the text to weaken the proclaimed authority of government.
1 Corinthians 6:19
"Your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit" changed to "the body of YOU people is [the] temple of the holy spirit."
To avoid recognition of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the individual believer, the revision modifies "body" to a more collective form in harmony with the opposing JW doctrine.
1 Corinthians 10:4
"The Rock was Christ" changed to "that rock-mass meant the Christ."
The passage depicts the preincarnate Jesus exhibiting his divine nature by being present many centuries earlier. This revision tries to conceal his eternal nature with a more figurative interpretation of "the Rock."
1 Corinthians 12:11
"As he determines" changed to "as it wills."
The NWT finds many ways to disguise the personality of the Holy Spirit. In this case the third person pronoun exercising individual conscience and will is replaced with an impersonal pronoun.
1 Corinthians 14:14-16
"Spirit" changed to "[gift of the] spirit."
Like several other Biblical passages, this one indicates the distinctive presence of the human spirit as distinguished from the mind and body. The JWs evade these distinctions and try to disguise them with related revisions.
1 Corinthians 15:2
"By this gospel you are saved" changed to "through which YOU are also being saved."
Similar to the Acts 16:30 revision above, this one again obscures the completeness of salvation by grace. The JW's salvation exists as an extended process ("being saved") with the outcome being uncertain until final judgment before Jehovah.
Galatians 6:18
"Your spirit" changed to "the spirit YOU [show]."
Similar to the 1 Corinthians 14 revision above, this one attempts to obscure the reality of the individual human spirit by presenting it more as an attitude of action than an entity.
Philippians 1:23
"To depart and be with Christ" changed to "the releasing and the being with Christ."
Paul's eagerness indicates that the believer's spirit goes immediately into Christ's presence at death. The revision suggests that death and being with Christ are two separate steps in an extended process, as the JWs believe in soul sleep (i.e., the unconscious state of the human spirit awaiting the resurrection).
Colossians 1:19
"His fullness" changed to "fullness."
The definite Greek article (to), translated "his," indicates that Jesus shares the Father's divine nature as also shown in Colossians 2:9. The revisions evade the truth by concealing the similarity of the two passages.
Colossians 2:9
"The fullness of deity" changed to "the fullness of the divine quality."
The Greek theotes, translated "deity," literally means divine essence or divinity. As the JWs reject the divine nature of Jesus, a revision is inserted to suggest that Jesus is limited to only divine-like characteristics.
I Timothy 4:1
"The Spirit" changed to "the inspired utterance."
This revision attempts to obscure the reality and activity of the Holy Spirit by representing it as a message instead of an entity. (Similar revisions found in 1 John 4:1, 3, 6 with "expression" being utilized in place of "utterance.")
Titus 2:13
"Our great God and Savior Jesus Christ" changed to "the great God and of [the] Savior of us, Christ Jesus."
Similar to the Romans 9:5 revision shown above, a distinct proclamation of Jesus as God is obscured by the altered text. (Similar rewording also found in 2 Peter 1:1.)
Hebrews 1:8
"Your throne, 0 God" changed to "God is your throne."
The revision avoids addressing the Son, Jesus, as God to validate the JWs' rejection of his divine nature.
Hebrews 9:14
"The eternal Spirit" changed to "an everlasting spirit."
Similar to the Romans 2:29 revision above, the switching of the article before the adjective represents the work of the Holy Spirit in a more indirect/impersonal manner.
Hebrews 12:9
"Father of our spirits" changed to "Father of our spiritual life."
Similar to the 1 Corinthians 14 revision shown above, this one tries to obscure the distinctive reality of human spirits by replacing them with a more abstract noun.
Hebrews 12:23
"The spirits of righteous men" changed to "the spiritual lives of righteous ones."
This revision represents the same noun-switching as described in Hebrews 12:9 above.
Hebrews 12:28
"We are receiving a kingdom" changed to "we are to receive a kingdom."
An orthodox Christian understanding of the Kingdom recognizes it as primarily established through Jesus' victorious death, then further through post-resurrection displays of his power, and perpetually through the addition of new believers into God's family. The JWs teach that Jesus' Kingdom did not begin until his invisible return in 1914. The form of the Greek word for "receiving" (paralambano) implies a current condition, but the revision suggests a future event according to the JW doctrine.
1 Peter 1:11
"Spirit of Christ in them was pointing" changed to "the spirit in them was indicating concerning Christ."
Another example of the supernatural presence of Jesus in the life of a Christian is obscured again by this revision as the JW doctrinal view presents him as more limited.
1 Peter 3:18-19
"By the Spirit, through whom" changed to "in the spirit. In this [state]."
Similar to several examples presented above, in this passage the presence and personality of the Holy Spirit is obscured with a more abstract representation of the Holy Spirit to accommodate the JW doctrine.
Jude 19
"Have the Spirit" changed to "having spirituality."
Similar to Galatians 6:18 above, this revision attempts to obscure the separate presence of the Holy Spirit.
Revelation 3:14
"Ruler of God's creation" changed to "beginning of the creation by God."
The altered prepositions distract from the sovereignty of Jesus indicated in the passage and suggests that the real power of creation was accomplished through the Father, as the JWs believe that Jesus is a created being.
Author's Note


Approximately one-forth of the verse citations above were derived from The New World Translation on Trial by Robert Bowman in the Christian Research Journal, 11:3 (Winter/Spring, 1989), p.20. The rest of this inventory was compiled from the author's own comparisons of doctrinally critical verses with the references cited in the introduction. There are many more examples of Biblical distortions by the JWs than those presented here. This assortment is limited to the more detectable and doctrinally significant examples.​

[/td]

Ones in darkness you are listening to. All trinitarians are.

 

[DavidTree]

I would like to ask Jehovah’s Witness readers to think carefully and honestly about the theological implications of the New World Translation at John 1:1.

The NWT says, “the Word was a god,” while also saying “the Word was with God.” If both statements are taken at face value, this seems to describe two divine beings existing together in the beginning .... one who is called “God,” and another who is called “a god.” But Scripture repeatedly insists there is only one God. Isaiah 43:10 says, “Before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.” Isaiah 45:5 says, “There is no God besides me.” The Bible does not leave room for secondary or lesser gods.

So how can the Word be “a god” without introducing more than one true divine being?

If the Word is truly “a god,” then this appears to move away from biblical monotheism toward multiple divine beings. But if there is only one true God, then calling the Word “a god” creates a category the Bible itself never allows. In Scripture, there are not ranks or classes of deity .....there is only the one eternal Creator.

This is why many have understood John’s wording differently. The Greek construction describes nature or essence, not “a separate god.” In other words, John is not teaching that the Word is another god alongside Jehovah, but that the Word shares the very nature of God while remaining personally distinct.

So the question becomes: does “a god” actually protect monotheism .....or does it unintentionally undermine it?

I encourage everyone to examine whether this translation truly reflects the Bible’s consistent teaching that there is only one God.

In Scripture there are ranks of deity, when the 'deity' are 'elohim' as with angelic beings.

Satan is a Arch angel = the highest created angel

Satan is called "the god of this world" = 2 Cor 4:4
In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

1 Corinthians 8:5
Truly even if indeed there are those called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, as there are many gods and many lords,

 

[DavidTree]

Ones in darkness you are listening to. All trinitarians are.

See Post 11

Why are you still fighting against the TRUTH???
Elohim Said, "Let Us make man in Our image according to Our likeness

Are you Jewish???

 

[FreeInChrist]

In Scripture there are ranks of deity, when the 'deity' are 'elohim' as with angelic beings.

Satan is a Arch angel = the highest created angel

Satan is called "the god of this world" = 2 Cor 4:4
In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

1 Corinthians 8:5
Truly even if indeed there are those called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, as there are many gods and many lords,

I know all about satan being called the God of this world.... but he was not called a god.

I am speaking only of the one called a god that was referenced in John 1 in the NWT. The Word.

The Word who became flesh in John 1:14

The Word who was a god, becoming flesh in John 1:14 points Jesus as being a god. ... and this forever removes Him from being equal with His Father....

Fred Franz the 1950 translator with 2 years of college Greek had to really hunt for other translations that refer to the Word as a god... I have, as yet only found 2 before him....

1808: “and the word was a god.” The New Testament in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text.

1864: “and a god was the word.” The Emphatic Diaglott, interlinear reading, by Benjamin Wilson.
And one contemporary... 1958: “and the Word was a God.” The New Testament, by James L. Tomanek.

I'll ignore the 4th, latecomer as he may have been copying the NWT in 1975.

There had ben a lot of debate on this and it seems a general consensus was that when
The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures renders John 1:1:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.”

The key Greek phrase is: kai theos ēn ho logos

As mentioned before, when a predicate noun (like theos) comes before the verb and lacks the article, Greek grammar typically emphasizes nature or quality, not indefiniteness.

If John had wanted to clearly say “a god” (one among others), Greek had clearer ways to express that.

Most mainstream Greek grammarians ... including scholars who are not Trinitarian ... understand this construction as qualitative:

“the Word was divine” or “the Word was God” (in nature)

That’s why essentially all major translations — Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, and even many non-evangelical academic translations render it “the Word was God.”

So the question remains if Fred Franz translated the NWT to avoid the Trinity?

The translation was produced by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society (Jehovah’s Witnesses), which officially rejects the Trinity.

Their theology specifically holds that:

1. Jesus is a created being

2.He is divine in a lesser sense ( the NWT certainly points this way)

3.He is not equal to the Father

So yes , their rendering of John 1:1 aligns with their doctrine!

Whether one sees that as theological bias depends on perspective, but it is certainly not the consensus rendering among Greek scholars.

 

[DavidTree]

I know all about satan being called the God of this world.... but he was not called a god.

I am speaking only of the one called a god that was referenced in John 1 in the NWT. The Word.

The Word who became flesh in John 1:14

The Word who was a god, becoming flesh in John 1:14 points Jesus as being a god. ... and this forever removes Him from being equal with His Father....

Fred Franz the 1950 translator with 2 years of college Greek had to really hunt for other translations that refer to the Word as a god... I have, as yet only found 2 before him....

1808: “and the word was a god.” The New Testament in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text.

1864: “and a god was the word.” The Emphatic Diaglott, interlinear reading, by Benjamin Wilson.
And one contemporary... 1958: “and the Word was a God.” The New Testament, by James L. Tomanek.

I'll ignore the 4th, latecomer as he may have been copying the NWT in 1975.

There had ben a lot of debate on this and it seems a general consensus was that when
The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures renders John 1:1:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.”

The key Greek phrase is: kai theos ēn ho logos

As mentioned before, when a predicate noun (like theos) comes before the verb and lacks the article, Greek grammar typically emphasizes nature or quality, not indefiniteness.

If John had wanted to clearly say “a god” (one among others), Greek had clearer ways to express that.

Most mainstream Greek grammarians ... including scholars who are not Trinitarian ... understand this construction as qualitative:

“the Word was divine” or “the Word was God” (in nature)

That’s why essentially all major translations — Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, and even many non-evangelical academic translations render it “the Word was God.”

So the question remains if Fred Franz translated the NWT to avoid the Trinity?

The translation was produced by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society (Jehovah’s Witnesses), which officially rejects the Trinity.

Their theology specifically holds that:

1. Jesus is a created being

2.He is divine in a lesser sense ( the NWT certainly points this way)

3.He is not equal to the Father

So yes , their rendering of John 1:1 aligns with their doctrine!

Whether one sees that as theological bias depends on perspective, but it is certainly not the consensus rendering among Greek scholars.

The JW's intentionally mistranslated the Holy Scriptures for the main purpose of making Elohim WORD into a creataed being.

And Jesus answered and said to them: “Take heed that no one deceives you.
For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many...........
...............Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many