A knock on my door

[civic]

I usually try to set an appointment with them for a certain time. That has worked well for me; they don’t want a broken appointment on their conscience!

Doug

Yes I remember that from 30 years ago when I lived in an apartment

 

[TibiasDad]

I found proof that John never used Colwell's Rule nor the "qualitative rule" in any of the nineteen truly parallel uses of John 1:1c

Well of course not, Colwell hadn’t been born yet.

As for the “qualitative rule”, Theos in John 1:1c is a predicate of Ho Logos, which much acts as an adjective would in English. It tells us what the Word was, therefore it is necessarily qualitative in nature.

Doug

 

[Ray]

No I have not seen them since that day

They probably pulled a Dust Off move on you.

“Those Who Receive You Not”: The Rite of Wiping Dust Off the Feet​

Soon as you mentioned bible studying and men's disciple group you scared them off.

 

[TibiasDad]

I found proof that John never used Colwell's Rule nor the "qualitative rule" in any of the nineteen truly parallel uses of John 1:1c

Well of course not, Colwell hadn’t been born yet.

As for the “qualitative rule”, Theos in John 1:1c is a predicate of Ho Logos, which much acts as an adjective would in English. It tells us what the Word was.

There are many times that Theos sans the article is translated as God, even in the NWT if memory serves, such as:

Matthew 5:9, Happy are the peaceable, for they will be called “sons of God.” ·

Matthew 6:24, No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will stick to the one and despise the other. You cannot slave for God and for riches.

Luke 1:35, In answer the angel said to her: "Holy Spirit will come upon you, and power of the Most High will overshadow you. For that reason also what is born will be holy, God’s Son. ·

Luke 1:76-78, But as for you, young child, you will be called a prophet of the Most High, for you will go in advance before Jehovah to make his ways ready, to give knowledge of salvation to his people by forgiveness of their sins, because of the tender compassion of our God. With this [compassion] a daybreak will visit us from on high.

There are many more examples, so the Watchtower’s claim that the lack of an article means a lower case “god” is necessary is not even close to being true.

Moreover, a lower case “g” makes no sense in the flow of the verse.

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

The verse is basically three facts about the Word. He was “in the beginning”, meaning he was eternally existent. He was in the company of the Father (God) in eternity past. And he was God.

If John didn’t intend to say that Jesus was God, why would John use Theos as a description for the Word?

To try to distinguish Jesus’s nature from the nature of God the Father, John would not have used “Kai”, “and”, he would have used “de”, but. It would have read something like “In the Beginning was the Word, and Word was with God; but the Word was only a god.

But the use of “Kai” is expressing a positive progression, an expression of continual addition to the nature of the Word.

To a Jew, there would not be any other god, for, ironically enough, Isa 43:10, the Jehovah’s Witness’s namesake verse, says unequivocally:

You are my witnesses,” declares the Lord,
“and my servant whom I have chosen,
so that you may know and believe me
and understand that I am he.
Before me no god was formed,
nor will there be one after me.

Jehovah precludes the existence of any other kind of actual lesser god. So John would not have called Jesus “a god” or describe him as a lesser divine! Jesus was either God or just a prophet; but John didn’t believe he was just a prophet.


Doug