|
The
Jehovah's Witnesses and John 1:1
In [the] beginning the
Word was, and the Word was with God,
and the Word was a god." The New World Translation
This is one
of the most common verses of contention between the Jehovah's Witnesses
and Christians. Their false assumption is that Jesus is not God in flesh,
but Michael the archangel who became a man. Therefore, since they
deny that Jesus is divine, they have altered the Bible in John 1:1 so that
Jesus is not divine in nature. The New World Translation has added
the word "a" to the verse so it says, "...and the Word was a
god." The correct translation for this verse is "In the
beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was
God." This is how it is rendered in the NASB, NIV, KJV,
NKJV, ASV, RSV, etc.
The New World translation is incorrect in
its translation of this verse for several reasons. First of all, the
Bible teaches a strict monotheism. To say that Jesus is "a
god" is to suggest that there is another god besides YHWH, which is
contrary to scripture (Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8, etc.). Of course, the
Jehovah's Witnesses will respond that Jesus is not the Almighty God, but a
"lesser" kind of God. He is the "mighty God" as
is referenced in Isaiah 9:6, "For a child will be born to us, a
son will be given to us, and the government will rest on His shoulders,
and His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal
Father, Prince of Peace." Therefore, they say that Jesus is
the mighty god, but not the Almighty God.
The immediate problem with this explanation is
that YHWH is also called the Mighty God in Jeremiah 32:18 and Isaiah
10:20. In all three verses, including Isaiah 9:6, the Hebrew word
for "mighty" (gibbor) is used.
- Isaiah 10:20-21, "Now it will
come about in that day that the remnant of Israel, and those of the
house of Jacob who have escaped, will never again rely on the one who
struck them, but will truly rely on the LORD, the Holy One of
Israel. 21A remnant will return, the remnant of
Jacob, to the mighty God."
- Jer. 32:18, "who showest
lovingkindness to thousands, but repayest the iniquity of fathers into
the bosom of their children after them, O great and mighty God.
the LORD of hosts is His name."
We can see that
the Jehovah's Witness explanation is not valid. Both the Son and God
are called the Mighty God.
Furthermore, how many actual gods are there in
scripture? The obvious answer is that there is only one God in
existence. Though there are others who have been falsely called gods
(1 Cor. 8:5-6) or even said to be "as God" like Moses (Ex. 4:16;
7:1), there is only one real God (Gal. 4:8-9; Isaiah 44:6,8). If Jesus is
"a god" that was "with God" in the beginning, then is
Jesus a true god or a false god?
But, the Jehovah's Witnesses often claim that
Jesus is a god in the sense that Moses was called a god. But, Moses
was not called a god. Rather, he would be "as
God."
- "Moreover, he shall speak for
you to the people; and it shall come about that he shall be as a mouth
for you, and you shall be as God to him, (Exodus 4:16).
- "Then the Lord said to Moses,
'See, I make you as God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be
your prophet,'" (Exodus 7:1).
Why was Moses
going to "as God" to Pharaoh? Because Moses was given the
authority and power to display powerful miracles that decimated much of
Egypt. Was Moses really a god? Being "as God" in
regards to power given to perform miracles over Egypt is not the same
thing as being called "a god" that was in the beginning with
God, (John 1:1).
John was a strict Jew, a monotheist. Does the
Jehovah's Witness really think that John would be saying that there was
another God besides Jehovah, even if it were Jesus? Being raised a good
Jew, the apostle John would never believe that there was more than one God
in existence. Yet, he compared the word with God, said the word was God,
and that the word became flesh (John 1:1,14).
John 1:1 in a literal translation reads
thus: "In beginning was the word, and the word was with the
God, and God was the word." Notice that it says "God
was the word." This is the actual word for word
translation. It is not saying that "a god was the
word." That wouldn't make sense. Let me break it down
into three statements.
- "In
beginning was the word..."
(en arche
en ho logos)
- A very simple statement that the
Word was in the beginning.
- "and
the word was with the God..."
(kai ho logos en pros ton theon)
- This same Word was
with God.
- "and
God was the word." -- Properly translated as "and the Word
was God."
(kai theos en ho logos)
Regarding
statement 3 above, the correct English translation is "...and the
Word was God," not "and God was the word."
This is because if there is only one definite article
("ho"="the") in a clause where two nouns are in the
nominative ("subject") form ("theos" and
"logos"), then the noun with the definite article
("ho"="the") is the subject. In this case
"ho logos" means that "the word" is the subject of the
clause. Therefore, "...the Word was God" is the
correct translation, not "God was the Word."1
But this does not negate the idea that John is speaking of only one God,
not two, even though the Jehovah's Witnesses maintain that Jesus is
"a god," or the "mighty god" as was addressed above.
Is there suddenly a new god in the text of John
1:1? It is the same God that is being spoken of in part 2 as in part
3. How do the Jehovah's Witnesses maintain that the word had somehow
become a god in this context, since there is only one God
mentioned? Remember, the Jehovah's Witnesses teach that Jesus was Michael
the Archangel. Therefore, is there any place in the Bible where an
angel is called "a god," besides Satan being called the god of
this world in 2 Cor. 4:3-4?
John 20:28 -
"Thomas answered and said to Him, 'My Lord and my God!'"
In the Greek in
John 20:28 Thomas said to Jesus, "ho kurios mou, kai ho theos mou,"
"The Lord of me, and the God of me." If Jesus was
not God, but "a" god, then shouldn't Jesus have corrected
Thomas? Shouldn't Jesus have said, "No Thomas, I am not the
God. I am a god."? But Jesus did not. To do
so would have been ludicrous. Nevertheless, the Jehovah's Witness
will say that Thomas was so stunned by Jesus' appearance, that he
swore. This is ridiculous because it means that Thomas, a devout man
of God, swore in front of Jesus and used the Lord's name in vain in
violation of Exodus 20:7. This is hardly the case since we find no
New Testament equivalent of a disciple of Christ using God's name in vain.
In conclusion, John 1:1 is best translated
without the "a" inserted into the text. "The Word
was God" is the best translation. This way, we do not run
into the danger of polytheism, with Jesus being "a god."
We do not have Thomas the disciples swearing and using God's name in
vain. And, we do not have the problem of Jesus being a "mighty
god" and yet not the God -- even though God Himself is called
the Mighty God (Jeremiah 32:18; Isaiah 10:20).
___________________
1. Chapman, B. (1994). Greek New Testament
Insert. (2nd ed., revised.). Quakertown, PA: Stylus
Publishing. Also, Louw, J. P. (1989; Published in
electronic form by Logos Research Systems, 1996). Greek-English lexicon of
the New Testament : Based on semantic domains (electronic edition of the
2nd ed.) (Page 592). New York: United Bible societies.
Return to the Jehovah's
Witness Page
|