Mr. Gilmour makes some interesting observations in this article. I also appreciate his respectful tone in approaching the subject of one seeking dialogue with WT insiders on religious subjects and getting frustrated by not getting meaningful "conversations" with them.
Wonderment
JoinedPosts by Wonderment
-
11
Blog - Jehovah's Witnesses and (Academic) Dialogue with Non-Members at the Society of Biblical Literature?
by Mickey mouse inhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-gilmour/jehovahs-witnesses-and-ac_b_987545.html.
excerpt (bold added):.
intrigued by this gap in the scholarly conversation about contemporary uses of the bible, i recently proposed an sbl session examining the watch tower bible and tract society's use of scripture.
-
-
-
14
Curious: How Does 1 Tim 6:4 Appear in the Interlinear Greek (aka "purple bible")?
by DarioKehl inwe've all seen the line-by-line comparison of john 1:1 with the addition of "a god" when "was god" is visible in the left margin under "theos" in the infamous grimace/barney/grape crush purple bible book.
i'd check for myself, but unfortunately, i hastily rid my house of all things wt in a purging fit while beginning my fade.
and let me tell you, the fire was spectacular!
-
-
Wonderment
Even though I made a previous observation as to the meaning of the Greek word rendered "mentally diseased" in the NWT, I do not approve of the application the WT Society is making of the Greek term to those who disagree with the Society.
It is wrong for the WT to suggest that anyone not agreeing with their organization is "mentally diseased," even if the Greek term allows for such translation. It is the application of 1 Timothy 6:4 to those who have left their organization for not believing everything they teach which is wrong.
-
14
Curious: How Does 1 Tim 6:4 Appear in the Interlinear Greek (aka "purple bible")?
by DarioKehl inwe've all seen the line-by-line comparison of john 1:1 with the addition of "a god" when "was god" is visible in the left margin under "theos" in the infamous grimace/barney/grape crush purple bible book.
i'd check for myself, but unfortunately, i hastily rid my house of all things wt in a purging fit while beginning my fade.
and let me tell you, the fire was spectacular!
-
-
Wonderment
Correction... cognate:
"In classical Greek the noun nosos and the cognate verb noseo are used primarily in connection with illness. It can also be used generally of ‘distress, anguish’ and figuratively of character defects and mental illness." (TCBL, Hebrew-English Dictionary)
-
14
Curious: How Does 1 Tim 6:4 Appear in the Interlinear Greek (aka "purple bible")?
by DarioKehl inwe've all seen the line-by-line comparison of john 1:1 with the addition of "a god" when "was god" is visible in the left margin under "theos" in the infamous grimace/barney/grape crush purple bible book.
i'd check for myself, but unfortunately, i hastily rid my house of all things wt in a purging fit while beginning my fade.
and let me tell you, the fire was spectacular!
-
-
Wonderment
Interestingly, the Portuguese NWT edition translates 1 Tim. 6:4 this way:
"ele está enfunado [de orgulho], não entendendo nada, mas tendo mania de criar questões e debates sobre palavras."
A translation into English would be something like this: "he is puffed up [with pride], not understanding anything, but having mania [obsession, delusions, craze] of creating questions and debates about words."
A related term to Portuguese "mania" is "mental illness."
Some English translations used for the Greek word, noson are:
doting, morbid, morbid interest, morbid appetite, morbid fondness, morbid craving, morbid passion, sick, touch'd with a spirit of chicanery and wrangling, delirious, infirm, a sickly longing, an itch, unhealthy concern,unhealthy craving, obsessed, driven mad, etc.
"In classical Greek the noun nosos and the congate verb noseo are used primarily in connection with illness. It can also be used generally of ‘distress, anguish’ and figuratively of character defects and mental illness." (TCBL, Hebrew-English Dictionary)
"Noseo signifies 'to be ill, to be ailing,' whether in body or mind..." (Vine's)
"The use of noseo in 1 Tim. 6:4 corresponds to the Hel. usage of the vb. Craving for controversy and disputes about words point to a sick condition in the inner self." (N.I. Dictionary of NT Theology)
-
18
I have just finished the New Testament!
by TimothyT inalthough i was a jw for almost all my life, i have just finished reading the new testament for the first time.
i have been disfellowshipped for over 3 weeks and it has taken me those 3 weeks to get through it all.
i have really enjoyed it and i have learnt a lot.
-
-
Wonderment
Tim:
I appreciate your brief summary. I agree with your conclusions.
-
39
The New Testament in Plain English and John 1:1
by Wonderment in.
the new testament in plain english (published, 2003) translates john 1:1c as: "the word was god.
" however, a footnote on this verse says: "or, deity, divine (which is actually a better translation, because the greek definite article is not present before this greek word).
-
-
Wonderment
Ernst Haenchen quote: In fact, for the author of the hymn, as for the Evangelist, only the Father was ‘God' (ho theós; cf 17:3); ‘the Son' was subordinate to him (cf. 14:28). [...] It was quite possible in Jewish and Christian monotheism to speak of divine beings that existed alongside and under God but were not identical with him. Phil 2:6-10 proves that. In that passage Paul depicts just such a divine being, who later became man in Jesus Christ, and before whom every knee will one day bow. But it should be noted that the Son will eventually return all authority to the Father (1 Cor 15:28), so that his glory may be complete. Thus, in both Philippians and John 1:1 it is not a matter of a dialectical relationship between two-in-one, but of a personal union of two entities..." [...] [theós] is not the same thing as [ho theós] (‘divine' is not the same thing as ‘God'). See full quote above.
-
39
The New Testament in Plain English and John 1:1
by Wonderment in.
the new testament in plain english (published, 2003) translates john 1:1c as: "the word was god.
" however, a footnote on this verse says: "or, deity, divine (which is actually a better translation, because the greek definite article is not present before this greek word).
-
-
Wonderment
Perry:
I see that you quote Col 1 showing, that by Christ all things were created by him. Strange, that you think that Christ created everything (and the first human pair?). Yet, Christ himself said that ‘He [God] created them, male and female.' (Mt 19:4. Compare with Mk 10:6) Why did Christ say "He" instead of "me," or "I"? Furthermore, the Greek word for "by" can be equally rendered "through," where Christ is shown as the mediating agent of creation.
Hebrews 1: is shown by your reference as Christ being addressed as "God." Can I remind you that bible versions are not unanimous with that. Some bible versions say: "God is your throne...", which changes the thought.
1 Timothy 3:16 is quoted where it says that "God is manifest in the flesh." Notwithstanding, many versions show the preferred reading, "He was manifested in the flesh" with the obvious reference to Christ. See The Living Translation, Contemporary English Version, and others.
You said: "John 1: 1 is in perfect harmony with the rest of the NT."
I agree.Ernst Haenchen points out the following:
-
39
The New Testament in Plain English and John 1:1
by Wonderment in.
the new testament in plain english (published, 2003) translates john 1:1c as: "the word was god.
" however, a footnote on this verse says: "or, deity, divine (which is actually a better translation, because the greek definite article is not present before this greek word).
-
-
Wonderment
erbie said:
We know that the Hebrew Scriptures make it clear that Jehovah, or YHWH, is the only true God. Indeed, he says 'other than me there are none'.
Absolutely right!
If there is only one true God, and all others are false, then the Watchtower is saying that Jesus is a false god.
<!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } PRE { font-family: "Times New Roman" } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } -->
A Commentary on the Gospel of John, by Ernst Haenchen says:
John 1:1: “and divine (of the category divinity) was the Logos” - “In order to avoid misunderstanding, it may be inserted here that [theós] and [ho theós] (‘god, divine’ and ‘the God’) were not the same in this period. Philo has therefore written: the [lógos] means only [theós] (‘divine’) and not [ho theós] (‘God’) since the logos is not God in the strict sense. Philo was not thinking of giving up Jewish monotheism. In a similar fashion, Origen, too, interprets: the Evangelist does not say that the logos is ‘God,’ but only that the logos is ‘divine.’ In fact, for the author of the hymn, as for the Evangelist, only the Father was ‘God’ (ho theós; cf 17:3); ‘the Son’ was subordinate to him (cf. 14:28). […] It was quite possible in Jewish and Christian monotheism to speak of divine beings that existed alongside and under God but were not identical with him. Phil 2:6-10 proves that. In that passage Paul depicts just such a divine being, who later became man in Jesus Christ, and before whom every knee will one day bow. But it should be noted that the Son will eventually return all authority to the Father (1 Cor 15:28), so that his glory may be complete. Thus, in both Philippians and John 1:1 it is not a matter of a dialectical relationship between two-in-one, but of a personal union of two entities...” […] [theós] is not the same thing as [ho theós] (‘divine’ is not the same thing as ‘God’). […] When Bultmann objects that one should then expect theios (‘divine’) instead of [theós] (‘god’) he overlooks the fact that theios says less than what is here affirmed of the Logos and would either make use of a literary Greek entirely foreign to the Gospel of John, or express a different meaning. (Ernst Haenchen, A Commentary on the Gospel of John [Das Johannese vangelium. Ein Kommentar] . John 1, translated by Robert W. Funk, pp. 108-111.)
-
39
The New Testament in Plain English and John 1:1
by Wonderment in.
the new testament in plain english (published, 2003) translates john 1:1c as: "the word was god.
" however, a footnote on this verse says: "or, deity, divine (which is actually a better translation, because the greek definite article is not present before this greek word).
-
-
Wonderment
The New Testament in Plain English (published, 2003) translates John 1:1c as: "the Word was God." However, a footnote on this verse says: "or, Deity, Divine (which is actually a better translation, because the Greek definite article is not present before this Greek word)."
Thank you for all your comments on this post!
I would like to add a thought that came up to mind as I read their footnote on John 1:1c.
If as they say, "Deity, Divine, which is actally a better translation," why not use the "better" translation in the main text, and then choose to use a rendering which admittedly is not as good as the suggested one in the footnote? What? Is it more important to follow tradition than it is to convey the most appropiate reading? Is is more important to be "popular" and perhaps, sell more bibles when the translator prefers traditional renderings which admittedly are not as good as other alternative readings?
-
39
The New Testament in Plain English and John 1:1
by Wonderment in.
the new testament in plain english (published, 2003) translates john 1:1c as: "the word was god.
" however, a footnote on this verse says: "or, deity, divine (which is actually a better translation, because the greek definite article is not present before this greek word).
-
-
Wonderment
The New Testament in Plain English (published, 2003) translates John 1:1c as: "the Word was God." However, a footnote on this verse says: "or, Deity, Divine (which is actually a better translation, because the Greek definite article is not present before this Greek word)."
I would like to know what you all think of this comment.