FreeInChrist
Active Member
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.
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.
