hooberus,
With all due respect, your last three posts appear to be a lot of gibberish.
It seems to me that in these translations the word "one" simply means the generic term "one" as in the hypothetical phrase "the one soldier said to the other"
On what basis do you disagree with translators who are being guided by the latest advances in knowledge of Bible languages? Are you capable of reading NT Greek to the extent you are qualified to present such a challenge?
Hebrews 5:7 is but one example, as I've shown, where hos is translated in the NASB, NIV and other recent versions as "the One." You seem to be saying you just don't care what others say who are far wiser than you.
This seems to turn the pronoun used in Hebrews 5:7 into some sort of title. I do not myself follow this practice. I see no need for the word to be made into the capitalized phrase "the One" (as in some sort of title), instead of the simple uncapitalized "the one" as the above NIV version uses it.
Due to the antecedent of the relative pronoun, "the One" is the only correct way to translate hos in the examples I gave above, including Hebrews 5:7.
I see no need to defend myself againist arguments based on this. If you wish to discuss with those Trinitrians who argue that the word in Hebrews 5:7 should be translated as "the One" ( capitalized into some sort of title), the fact that you feel that they are being inconsistent in their interpretation of the phrase "the One" (capitalized) you should contact them.
Do you realize how silly your paragraph is? You are saying, in other words, "I don't choose to go by an accurate translation of the Bible. I prefer a Bible that is based upon outdated knowledge of ancient manuscripts. So your argument, herk, is with those who prefer to use more accurate translations."
While it is true that the JW's interpret "the One" as refering to one individual in both Hebrews 5:7 (NWT "the One") as well as John 19:37 (NWT "the One") the fact remains that they interpret the capitalized phrase "the One" NWT in one instance as refering to God and in another as refering to a creature.
The NWT is not the only Bible that does this. At Matthew 11:3, for example, several translations use a capital "O" for "One" as applied to Jesus. The context makes clear that the ones speaking did not expect Jesus to be God. Instead, they were expecting a Prophet, a Messiah born as a human and sent by God. (Compare Amplified Bible, NASB, NKJV, New Life Version, New Living Translation, The Message and others.) You seem to be under the impression that "One" with a capital "O" can only refer to God, but that is not the point of translators in using the capital "O". Their emphasis is on the fact that the individual "One" is special and that he is the only "One" in his category.
When Trinitarians such as myself say that the Father, Son, and Spirit are one. We are saying that they are one God. Hense, I do not claim that the phrase "one" means "three."
First you say that the three--Father, Son and Spirit--are "one," and then you say "I do not claim that the phrase 'one' means 'three'." Hello!!!
herk