John 1:1-2Cor 4:4

Keiw1

Active member
In the Greek lexicons( Greek language) At John 1:1 and 2 Cor 4:4, the true God' Greek word ends in a v= God capitol G. At both spots the word and satan' Greek word ends in a g= god small g. So i say every trinity scholar and Greek scholars know this is 100% fact. Why wont they say truth? Because hundreds of religions claiming to be christian would be proved false religion, billions of $$$ would be lost year after year, and 2 billion humans would sue them for taking their $$ when they know. That capitol G God in the last line at John 1:1 is only found in the altered translations( removal of Gods name to mislead by satans will in over 7000 places where God willed it to be) So guess who' will had a capitol G God put at John 1:1 when a small g is how it is written in Greek? It misleads all believing it into breaking Gods #1 commandment daily-RUN FROM THEM.
Will you look the Greek up for yourself to see its fact? Any can easily. translating works the same at both spots. 0 doubt.
 
Addressing the OP, Bro. dizerner is correct, "It's the same one God"..... in an ECHAD in Flesh. let 101G explain. firt the small case "g" in God in what you say is the Original text. 101G will offer a reason why. First if it was a small case "g" there it would be incorrect.... WHY? because of this. Deuteronomy 32:39 "See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."

here in Deuteronomy 32:39, God clearly distinguish himself ... "WITH" any "small case god". because in John 1:1b the "Word was WITH God. and that would be contradictory if the small case "g" god was "WITH" God.

now solution. why would, as you say, in the original text that the small case "g" would be used. answer, the Word was MADE Flesh, and was G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') 1. to make empty. or as Hebrews states "MADE LOWER THAN THE ANGELS. so the small "g' then would be appropriate, correct. but there is one problem.... his NATURE WHILE IN FLESH IT WAS THE SAME, according to Phil. 2:6. so what is the proper solution. the same as in "LORD", Lord, and 'lord". Notice "Lord", now OT to prove this OUT, Psalms 110:1 "A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." here "Lord" is really translated as "lord", the lower case "l" in lord. but notice is can be used for humans, or divine..... hence to solve the problem of human or Divine.... "Lord", with the "L" capitalize. well in Greek in the use of "GOD" it has only G2316, theos, and G2962, kurios. (here really do not address the nature of God, only G2316, theos do), as well, like G1203, despotes, and G3175, megistan and a few others. so G2316, theos was the problem for the Greeks and not God which in Hebrew was an ECHAD, in a plurality, which the Greeks could not address, because it as ... "UNKNOWN" to then as the ECHAD in a diversity of "ONE". so hence the small case "g" in God which was an "UNKNOWN" mistake. just as the Holy Ghost said via his apostle Paul when he was in Greece. . Acts 17:23 "For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you."

here the UNKNOWN "GOD", is G2316 θεός theos (the-os') but notice it's all capitalize. so 101G question, if a GOD is unknown why capitalize? so, going back to John 1:1 is not G2316 θεός theos (the-os') used there also?

so 101G agrees with out bro dizerner... CONTEXT makes the difference. and the process of elimination, like Deuteronomy 32:39 seals the deal. so when God himself say there is no"god" with him...... when God says it... for 101G it's a closed book then. for 101G believe God totally.

101G.
 
Last edited:
Addressing the OP, Bro. dizerner is correct, "It's the same one God"..... in an ECHAD in Flesh. let 101G explain. firt the small case "g" in God in what you say is the Original text. 101G will offer a reason why. First if it was a small case "g" there it would be incorrect.... WHY? because of this. Deuteronomy 32:39 "See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."

here in Deuteronomy 32:39, God clearly distinguish himself ... "WITH" any "small case god". because in John 1:1b the "Word was WITH God. and that would be contradictory if the small case "g" god was "WITH" God.

now solution. why would, as you say, in the original text that the small case "g" would be used. answer, the Word was MADE Flesh, and was G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') 1. to make empty. or as Hebrews states "MADE LOWER THAN THE ANGELS. so the small "g' then would be appropriate, correct. but there is one problem.... his NATURE WHILE IN FLESH IT WAS THE SAME, according to Phil. 2:6. so what is the proper solution. the same as in "LORD", Lord, and 'lord". Notice "Lord", now OT to prove this OUT, Psalms 110:1 "A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." here "Lord" is really translated as "lord", the lower case "l" in lord. but notice is can be used for humans, or divine..... hence to solve the problem of human or Divine.... "Lord", with the "L" capitalize. well in Greek in the use of "GOD" it has only G2316, theos, and G2962, kurios. (here really do not address the nature of God, only G2316, theos do), as well, like G1203, despotes, and G3175, megistan and a few others. so G2316, theos was the problem for the Greeks and not God which in Hebrew was an ECHAD, in a plurality, which the Greeks could not address, because it as ... "UNKNOWN" to then as the ECHAD in a diversity of "ONE". so hence the small case "g" in God which was an "UNKNOWN" mistake. just as the Holy Ghost said via his apostle Paul when he was in Greece. . Acts 17:23 "For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you."

here the UNKNOWN "GOD", is G2316 θεός theos (the-os') but notice it's all capitalize. so 101G question, if a GOD is unknown why capitalize? so, going back to John 1:1 is not G2316 θεός theos (the-os') used there also?

so 101G agrees with out bro dizerner... CONTEXT makes the difference. and the process of elimination, like Deuteronomy 32:39 seals the deal. so when God himself say there is no"god" with him...... when God says it... for 101G it's a closed book then. for 101G believe God totally.

101G.
The true God ends in v in Greek=God--when it ends in g its god.
 
In the Greek lexicons( Greek language) At John 1:1 and 2 Cor 4:4, the true God' Greek word ends in a v= God capitol G. At both spots the word and satan' Greek word ends in a g= god small g. So i say every trinity scholar and Greek scholars know this is 100% fact. Why wont they say truth? Because hundreds of religions claiming to be christian would be proved false religion, billions of $$$ would be lost year after year, and 2 billion humans would sue them for taking their $$ when they know. That capitol G God in the last line at John 1:1 is only found in the altered translations( removal of Gods name to mislead by satans will in over 7000 places where God willed it to be) So guess who' will had a capitol G God put at John 1:1 when a small g is how it is written in Greek? It misleads all believing it into breaking Gods #1 commandment daily-RUN FROM THEM.
Will you look the Greek up for yourself to see its fact? Any can easily. translating works the same at both spots. 0 doubt.
Where is the evidence in the Greek N.T. for your claims ? And which Greek text are you claiming your big G, little g is from ?

Also the ending with Θεόν means the accusitive case in Greek and Θεὸς is in the nominative case.
 
In the Greek lexicons( Greek language) At John 1:1 and 2 Cor 4:4, the true God' Greek word ends in a v= God capitol G. At both spots the word and satan' Greek word ends in a g= god small g. So i say every trinity scholar and Greek scholars know this is 100% fact. Why wont they say truth? Because hundreds of religions claiming to be christian would be proved false religion, billions of $$$ would be lost year after year, and 2 billion humans would sue them for taking their $$ when they know. That capitol G God in the last line at John 1:1 is only found in the altered translations( removal of Gods name to mislead by satans will in over 7000 places where God willed it to be) So guess who' will had a capitol G God put at John 1:1 when a small g is how it is written in Greek? It misleads all believing it into breaking Gods #1 commandment daily-RUN FROM THEM.
Will you look the Greek up for yourself to see its fact? Any can easily. translating works the same at both spots. 0 doubt.
basically the kjv is a sorcery text...
and, it is carelessness and unwillingness to start over and translate...
by jacob...... and translate by listening to Him every moment...
but since he will not, that continues an impasse..

the purpose of the kjv is to hide the real situation from souls
so that we His 144k will never return home....
that is the goal of it... seriously.

but that aside, Christ is indeed Deity... our Deity and our Captain.
 
Last edited:
Omission of the article with "Theos" does not mean the word is "a god." If we examine the passages where the article is not used with "Theos" we see the rendering "a god" makes no sense (Mt 5:9, 6:24; Lk 1:35, 78; 2:40; Jn 1:6, 12, 13, 18; 3:2, 21; 9:16, 33; Ro 1:7, 17, 18; 1 Co 1:30; 15:10; Phil 2:11, 13; Titus 1:1). The "a god" position would have the Jehovah's Witnesses translate every instance where the article is absent. As "a god (nominative), of a god (genitive), to or for a god (dative)." But they do not! "Theou" is the genitive case of the SAME noun "Theos" which they translate as "a god" in John 1:1. But they do not change "Theou" "of God" (Jehovah), in Matthew 5:9, Luke 1:35, 78; and John 1:6. The J.W.’s are not consistent in their biblical hermeneutics they have a bias which is clearly seen throughout their bible.

Other examples-In Jn.4:24 "God is Spirit, not a spirit. In 1 Jn .4:16 "God is love, we don’t translate this a love. In 1 Jn.1:5 "God is light" he is not a light or a lesser light.

WHAT DO GREEK SCHOLARS THINK ABOUT JEHOVAH'S WITNESS TRANSLATION OF JOHN 1:1?

Dr. J. J. Griesback: "So numerous and clear are the arguments and testimonies of Scriptures in favor of the true Deity of Christ, that I can hardly imagine how, upon the admission of the Divine authority of Scripture, and with regard to fair rules of interpretation, this doctrine can by any man be called in doubt. Especially the passage John 1:1 is so clear and so superior to all exception, that by no daring efforts of either commentators or critics can it be snatched out of the hands of the defenders of the truth."

Dr. Eugene A. Nida (Head of the Translation Department of the American Bible Society Translators of the GOOD NEWS BIBLE): "With regard to John 1:1 there is, of course, a complication simply because the NEW WORLD TRANSLATION was apparently done by persons who did not take seriously the syntax of the Greek". ( Bill and Joan Cetnar Questions for Jehovah's Witnesses "who love the truth" p..55

Dr. William Barclay (University of Glasgow, Scotland): "The deliberate distortion of truth by this sect is seen in their New Testament translations. John 1:1 translated:'. . . the Word was a god'.a translation which is grammatically impossible. it is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest. THE EXPOSITORY TIMES Nov, 1985

Dr. B. F. Westcott (Whose Greek text is used in JW KINGDOM INTERLINEAR): "The predicate (God) stands emphatically first, as in 4:24. It is necessarily without the article . . . No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form of expression, which simply affirms the true Deity of the Word . . . in the third clause `the Word' is declared to be `God' and so included in the unity of the Godhead." The Gospel According to St. John (Eerdmans,1953- reprint) p. 3, (The Bible Collector, July-December, 1971, p. 12.)

Dr. Anthony Hoekema, commented: Their New World Translation of the Bible is by no means an objective rendering of the sacred text into Modern English, but is a biased translation in which many of the peculiar teachings of the Watchtower Society are smuggled into the text of the Bible itself (The Four Major Cults, pp. 238, 239].

Dr. Ernest C. Colwell (University of Chicago): "A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb; . . .this statement cannot be regarded as strange in the prologue of the gospel which reaches its climax in the confession of Thomas. `My Lord and my God.' " John 20:28

Dr. F. F. Bruce (University of Manchester, England): "Much is made by Arian amateur grammarians of the omission of the definite article with `God' in the phrase `And the Word was God'. Such an omission is common with nouns in a predicate construction. `a god' would be totally indefensible."

Dr. Paul L. Kaufman (Portland OR.): "The Jehovah's Witness people evidence an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets of Greek grammar in their mistranslation of John 1:1."

Dr. Charles L. Feinberg (La Mirada CA.): "I can assure you that the rendering which the Jehovah's Witnesses give John 1:1 is not held by any reputable Greek scholar."

Dr. Robert Countess, who wrote a doctoral dissertation on the Greek text of the New World Translation, concluded that the The Christ of the New World Translation "has been sharply unsuccessful in keeping doctrinal considerations from influencing the actual translation .... It must be viewed as a radically biased piece of work. At some points it is actually dishonest. At others it is neither modern nor scholarly "78 No wonder British scholar H.H. Rowley asserted, "From beginning to end this volume is a shining example of how the Bible should not be translated."79 Indeed, Rowley said, this translation is "an insult to the Word of God."

Dr. Harry A. Sturz: (Dr. Sturz is Chairman of the Language Department and Professor of Greek at Biola College) "Therefore, the NWT rendering: "the Word was a god" is not a "literal" but an ungrammatical and tendential translation. A literal translation in English can be nothing other than: "the word was God." THE BIBLE COLLECTOR July - December, 1971 p. 12

Dr. J. Johnson of California State University, Long Beach. When asked to comment on the Greek, said, "No justification whatsoever for translating theos en ho logos as 'the Word was a god'. There is no syntactical parallel to Acts 23:6 where there is a statement in indirect discourse. Jn.1:1 is direct.. I am neither a Christian nor a Trinitarian.

DO ANY REPUTABLE GREEK SCHOLARS AGREE WITH THE NEW WORLD TRANSLATION OF JOHN 1:1?

A. T. Robertson: "So in John 1:1 theos en ho logos the meaning has to be the Logos was God, -not God was the Logos." A New short Grammar of the Greek Testament, AT. Robertson and W. Hersey Davis (Baker Book House, p. 279.

E. M. Sidebottom:"...the tendency to write 'the Word was divine' for theos en ho Iogos springs from a reticence to attribute the full Christian position to john. The Christ of the Fourth Gospel (S.P.C.K., 1961), p. 461.

C. K. Barrett: "The absence of the article indicates that the Word is God, but is not the only being of whom this is true; if ho theos had been written it would have implied that no divine being existed outside the second person of the Trinity." The Gospel According to St. John (S.P.C.K., 1955), p. 76.

C. H. Dodd: "On this analogy, the meaning of _theos en ho logos will be that the ousia of ho logos, that which it truly is, is rightly denominated theos... That is the ousia of ho theos (the personal God of Abraham,) the Father goes without saying. In fact, the Nicene homoousios to patri is a perfect paraphrase." "New Testament Translation Problems the bible Translator, 28, 1 (Jan. 1977), P. 104.

Randolph 0. Yeager: "Only sophomores in Greek grammar are going to translate ..and the Word was a God.' The article with logos, shows that to logos is thesubject of the verb en and the fact that theos is without the article designates it as the predicate nominative. The emphatic position of theos demands that we translate '...and the Word was God.' John is not saying as Jehovah's Witnesses are fond of teaching that Jesus was only one of many Gods. He is saying precisely the opposite." The Renaissance New Testament, Vol. 4 (Renaissance Press, 1980), P. 4.

Henry Alford: "Theos must then be taken as implying God, in substance and essence,--not ho theos, 'the Father,' in person. It noes not = theios; nor is it to be rendered a God--but, as in sarx engeneto, sarx expresses that state into which the Divine Word entered by a-definite act, so in theos en, theos expresses that essence which was His en arche:--that He was very God . So that this first verse must be connected thus: the Logos was from eternity,--was with God (the Father),--and was Himself God." (Alford's Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical Commentary, Vol. I, Part II Guardian 'press 1976 ; originally published 1871). p. 681.

Donald Guthrie: "The absence of the article with Theos has misled some into t inking teat the correct understanding of the statement would be that 'the word was a God' (or divine), but this is grammatically indefensible since Theos is a predicate." New Testament Theology (InterVarsity Press, 1981), p. 327.

Bruce M. Metzger, Professor of New Testament Language and literature at Princeton Theological Seminary said: "Far more pernicious in this same verse is the rendering, . . . `and the Word was a god,' with the following footnotes: " `A god,' In contrast with `the God' ". It must be stated quite frankly that, if the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists. In view of the additional light which is available during this age of Grace, such a representation is even more reprehensible than were the heathenish, polytheistic errors into which ancient Israel was so prone to fall. As a matter of solid fact, however, such a rendering is a frightful mistranslation." "The Jehovah's Witnesses and Jesus Christ," Theology Today (April 1953), p. 75.

James Moffatt: "'The Word was God . . .And the Word became flesh,' simply means he Word was divine . . . . And the Word became human.' The Nicene faith, in the Chalcedon definition, was intended to conserve both of these truths against theories that failed to present Jesus as truly God and truly man ...." Jesus Christ the Same (Abingdon-Cokesbury, 1945), p. 61.

E. C. Colwell: "...predicate nouns preceding the verb cannot be regarded as indefinite -or qualitative simply because they lack the article; it could be regarded as indefinite or qualitative only if this is demanded by the context,and in the case of John l:l this is not so." A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament," Journal of Biblical Literature, 52 (1933), p. 20.

Philip B. Harner: "Perhaps the clause could be translated, 'the Word had the same nature as God.' This would be one way of representing John's thought, which is, as I understand it,"that ho logos, no less than ho theos, had the nature of theos.""(Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns Mark 15:39 and John 1:1," journal of Biblical Literature, 92, 1 (March 1973), p. 87.

Philip Harner states in the Journal of Biblical Literature, 92, 1 (March 1973) on Jn.1:1 "In vs. 1c the Johannine hymn is bordering on the usage of 'God' for the Son, but by omitting the article it avoids any suggestion of personal identification of the Word with the Father. And for Gentile readers the line also avoids any suggestion that the Word was a second God in any Hellenistic sense." (pg. 86. Harner notes the source of this quote: Brown, John I-XII, 24)

Julius R. Mantey; "Since Colwell's and Harner's article in JBL, especially that of Harner, it is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 'The Word was a god.' Word-order has made obsolete and incorrect such a rendering .... In view of the preceding facts, especially because you have been quoting me out of context, I herewith request you not to quote the Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament again, which you have been doing for 24 years." Letter from Mantey to the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. "A Grossly Misleading Translation .... John 1:1, which reads 'In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God,' is shockingly mistranslated, 'Originally the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god,' in a New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, published under the auspices o Jehovah's Witnesses." Statement JR Mantey, published in various sources.

Many of these Greek scholars are world-renowned whose works the Jehovah's Witnesses have quoted in their publications to help them look reputable. Westcott is the Greek scholar who with Hort edited the Greek text of the New Testament used by the Jehovah's Witnesses. Yeager is a professor of Greek and the star pupil of Julius Mantey. Metzger is the world's leading scholar on the-textual criticism of the Greek New Testament. It is scholars of this quality who insist that John l: l cannot be taken to mean anything less than that the Word is the one true Almighty God.

I do want to say that there are some scholars that translate the word was a God or divine but they are in the very low percentages. If they were ever in a discussion with the scholars afore mentioned it would be clear they would not be able to hold a candle to their understanding. Yet JWs and a few other groups do run to these men's opinions to prop up their teaching.http://www.letusreason.org/jw38.htm

hope this helps !!!
 
The true God ends in v in Greek=God--when it ends in g its god.
1 Corinthians 8:5 "For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)"
here "gods" in the plural is
G2316 θεός theos (the-os') n.
1. (properly, in Greek) a god or deity. a supernatural, powerful entity (real or imagined).
2. (by Hebraism, especially with G3588) God, the Supreme Being, the Creator, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Yahweh by name.
3. (figuratively) a supreme magistrate (in the land).
[of uncertain affinity]
KJV: X exceeding, God, god(-ly, -ward)

so, what is G358? answer,
G3588 ὁ ho (ho) t.
ἡ he (hee) [feminine]
τό to (to') [neuter (each with various inflections)]
1. the.
2. (of a proper name) not expressed in English (i.e. the Adam, the Jesus).
3. (by context) the one.
4. (also) the thing.
5. (possessive) not expressed in English (i.e. the book of him, his book).
6. (genitive preceding infinitive, when expressed) for it (i.e. for it not to rain, James 5:17). otherwise, it is redundant as “the one” to do.
7. (nominative pronoun) he, they, she, it (rarely expressed in English. see Matthew 2:5 and Mark 14:64).
8. (implied possessive pronoun, by Hebraism) his, her, its, their.
9. (rarely) some.
10. (in an idiom) sometimes not expressed in English.
11. (rarely, with G3844) (personal) belongings.
{sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom}
[the definite article]
KJV: the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc.

NOTE definition #1.
now back to John 1:1 John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." the singular.

so, are you still saying that there was a "god" with God and was "God?" yes or no

101G.
 
Where is the evidence in the Greek N.T. for your claims ? And which Greek text are you claiming your big G, little g is from ?

Also the ending with Θεόν means the accusitive case in Greek and Θεὸς is in the nominative case.
It proves they are not being called the same thing.
 
basically the kjv is a sorcery text...
and, it is carelessness and unwillingness to start over and translate...
by jacob...... and translate by listening to Him every moment...
but since he will not, that continues an impasse..

the purpose of the kjv is to hide the real situation from souls
so that we His 144k will never return home....
that is the goal of it... seriously.

but that aside, Christ is indeed Deity... our Deity and our Captain.
YHWH(Jehovah) the Father is the only true God.
 
1 Corinthians 8:5 "For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)"
here "gods" in the plural is
G2316 θεός theos (the-os') n.
1. (properly, in Greek) a god or deity. a supernatural, powerful entity (real or imagined).
2. (by Hebraism, especially with G3588) God, the Supreme Being, the Creator, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Yahweh by name.
3. (figuratively) a supreme magistrate (in the land).
[of uncertain affinity]
KJV: X exceeding, God, god(-ly, -ward)

so, what is G358? answer,
G3588 ὁ ho (ho) t.
ἡ he (hee) [feminine]
τό to (to') [neuter (each with various inflections)]
1. the.
2. (of a proper name) not expressed in English (i.e. the Adam, the Jesus).
3. (by context) the one.
4. (also) the thing.
5. (possessive) not expressed in English (i.e. the book of him, his book).
6. (genitive preceding infinitive, when expressed) for it (i.e. for it not to rain, James 5:17). otherwise, it is redundant as “the one” to do.
7. (nominative pronoun) he, they, she, it (rarely expressed in English. see Matthew 2:5 and Mark 14:64).
8. (implied possessive pronoun, by Hebraism) his, her, its, their.
9. (rarely) some.
10. (in an idiom) sometimes not expressed in English.
11. (rarely, with G3844) (personal) belongings.
{sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom}
[the definite article]
KJV: the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc.

NOTE definition #1.
now back to John 1:1 John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." the singular.

so, are you still saying that there was a "god" with God and was "God?" yes or no

101G.
Every time one being called god in Greek ending in g=god small g. Ending in V = God.
 
Every time one being called god in Greek ending in g=god small g. Ending in V = God.
ERROR "God" is a plurality... of "ONE", do you understand that? now look at the definition again,
G2316 θεός theos (the-os') n.
1. (properly, in Greek) a god or deity. a supernatural, powerful entity (real or imagined).
2. (by Hebraism, especially with G3588) God, the Supreme Being, the Creator, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Yahweh by name.
3. (figuratively) a supreme magistrate (in the land).
[of uncertain affinity]
KJV: X exceeding, God, god(-ly, -ward)

so, what is G358? answer,
G3588 ὁ ho (ho) t.
ἡ he (hee) [feminine]
τό to (to') [neuter (each with various inflections)]
1. the.
2. (of a proper name) not expressed in English (i.e. the Adam, the Jesus).
3. (by context) the one.
4. (also) the thing.
5. (possessive) not expressed in English (i.e. the book of him, his book).
6. (genitive preceding infinitive, when expressed) for it (i.e. for it not to rain, James 5:17). otherwise, it is redundant as “the one” to do.
7. (nominative pronoun) he, they, she, it (rarely expressed in English. see Matthew 2:5 and Mark 14:64).
8. (implied possessive pronoun, by Hebraism) his, her, its, their.
9. (rarely) some.
10. (in an idiom) sometimes not expressed in English.
11. (rarely, with G3844) (personal) belongings.
{sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom}
[the definite article]
KJV: the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc.

NOTE definition #1.
now back to John 1:1 John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." the singular.
"the" G3588 when used is the supreme God can you read? my God.

101G.
 
another ERROR, see above

101G.
I didn't post error. One being called the true God in Greek that word ends in v.
ERROR "God" is a plurality... of "ONE", do you understand that? now look at the definition again,

"the" G3588 when used is the supreme God can you read? my God.

101G.
God is never plural. Elohim is never plural in Hebrew language for the God Israel served. It translated in Hebrew for that God= YHWH(Jehovah)-The supreme one or mighty one.
 
God is never plural.
Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."

God: H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') n-m.
אֱלֹהֵי 'elohiy (el-o-hee') [alternate plural]
1. (literally) supreme ones.
2. (hence, in the ordinary sense) gods.
3. (specifically, in the plural, especially with the article) the Supreme God (i.e. the all supreme).
4. (sometimes) supreme, used as a superlative.
5. (occasionally, by way of deference) supreme magistrates, the highest magistrates of the land.
6. (also) the supreme angels (entities of unspecified type).
[plural of H433]
KJV: angels, X exceeding, God (gods)(-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.
Root(s): H433

and H433: H433 אֱלוֹהַּ 'elowahh (el-o'-ah) n-m.
אֱלֹהַּ 'eloahh (el-o'-ah) [shortened (rarely)]
1. one with supreme strength and ability.
2. the Supreme Being, God the Creator, Yahweh by name.
3. a supreme entity, a god-like creature (that is, one of God's supreme creations, or one of man's inventions).
[probably prolonged (emphat.) from H410]
KJV: God, god.
Root(s): H410

101G.
 
Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."

God: H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') n-m.
אֱלֹהֵי 'elohiy (el-o-hee') [alternate plural]
1. (literally) supreme ones.
2. (hence, in the ordinary sense) gods.
3. (specifically, in the plural, especially with the article) the Supreme God (i.e. the all supreme).
4. (sometimes) supreme, used as a superlative.
5. (occasionally, by way of deference) supreme magistrates, the highest magistrates of the land.
6. (also) the supreme angels (entities of unspecified type).
[plural of H433]
KJV: angels, X exceeding, God (gods)(-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.
Root(s): H433

and H433: H433 אֱלוֹהַּ 'elowahh (el-o'-ah) n-m.
אֱלֹהַּ 'eloahh (el-o'-ah) [shortened (rarely)]
1. one with supreme strength and ability.
2. the Supreme Being, God the Creator, Yahweh by name.
3. a supreme entity, a god-like creature (that is, one of God's supreme creations, or one of man's inventions).
[probably prolonged (emphat.) from H410]
KJV: God, god.
Root(s): H410

101G.
Only plural in Hebrew for the false trinity gods served back then.
 
Back
Top Bottom