But it must have been complicated back in the 1960’s trying to explain (for example) John 1:1 to a Trinitarian. A JW would have to keep getting out a textbook on Greek to show John used *two different words *there.
**Or where others translate *the same ***Greek word
different ways. Tricky.
Easier if the translation is accurate and consistent.
Taking out God’s personal name 7000 times is also not the best way to translate God’s word in my opinion.
Thanks for your reply friend.
The bolded statement above just kills me! The reason Jehovah’s Witnesses translate John 1:1 as “a god” is because the Greek definite article
ho does not appear before
theos. Regardless’s statement above is particularly funny because the WBTS does that exact thing in John 1:1-18. In this passage, the word
theos (in one of its forms) appears 7-8 times, depending on the manuscript you’re using. The NWT translates it so that the word appears 8 times. Twice in verses 1 and 18, and once in verses 2, 6, 12, and 13. Let me show you the way they purposefully translate the Scriptures to fit their theology:
John 1:1-18
In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God
ton theon[sup]
1[/sup]], and the Word was a god [just *theos]. This one was in [the] beginning with God
ton theon[sup]
1[/sup]]. All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence. What has come into existence by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light is shining in the darkness, but the darkness has not overpowered it. There arose a man that was sent forth as a representative of God [just *theou; here, there is no definite article so the WBTS should have translated it “a god” or “the god,” yet they translate it as the Almighty God]: his name was John. This [man] came for a witness, in order to bear witness about the light, that people of all sorts might believe through him. He was not that light, but he was meant to bear witness about that light. The true light that gives light to every sort of man was about to come into the world. He was in the world, and the world came into existence through him, but the world did not know him. He came to his own home, but his own people did not take him in. However, as many as did receive him, to them he gave authority to become God’s [just *theou; the WBTS did the same thing here, it should be — according to Regardless’ opinion and sound translating — “a god,” etc., but they translate it as the Almighty God] children, because they were exercising faith in his name; and they were born, not from blood or from a fleshly will or from man’s will, but from God [just *theou, same problem as in verse 12]. So the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only-begotten son from a father; and he was full of undeserved kindness and truth. (John bore witness about him, yes, he actually cried out—this was the one who said [it]—saying: “The one coming behind me has advanced in front of me, because he existed before me.”) For we all received from out of his fullness, even undeserved kindness upon undeserved kindness. Because the Law was given through Moses, the undeserved kindness and the truth came to be through Jesus Christ. No man has seen God [just *theon; the same problem as in verses 6, 12,
and 13] at any time; the only-begotten god [just *theos; here, finally, the WBTS finally translates this word the same as in the final clause of verse 1: it took long enough!] who is in the bosom [position] with the Father is the one that has explained him.
As you can see, Regardless, the WBTS is not as good a translator as you might think. Since the majority of the time it translates the word
theos and derivatives as the Almighty God, it
should translate the last “
theos” in verse one as the Almighty God, but it can’t because its identity would crumble.
[sup]1[/sup] The definite article
ton is just another form of the article
ho.
