Johvah's witness arguments on John 1?

You will not convince them from any lessons on Greek. As far as translations are concerned, I would simply ask them why the need to write a cult specific (solo) translation changing what has been accepted by Christian students of the word as correct for almost two thousand years. That is, the Trinity of God.

If I recall, they did not write this translation until around the 1950's. My guess is that they were having too much trouble trying to convince their followers that Jesus was not God from the widely accepted translations available that declared that He was God. Don't like the message, just change it!

:jesus:

 

HP: Is it really that so much or could their motive be pure even though clearly mislead and deceived? Could they not honestly believe they are aiding in a correct understanding just as a lot of other translators do when they change the Word of God? I am certain they feel their presuppositions are correct and feel that they need to line up other troubling passages to better agree with the presuppositions they hold to be truth. I certainly believe that is what happens in many cases, and that is why I feel one of the greatest curses upon the Church has been the proliferation of so-called versions.

Could not certain presuppostions be in error due to deception, driving the changes they see as necessary for a better or more 'proper understanding of the text?'

 

This is why I prefer the KJV. They strived to do a word for word translation and when words were added to help express the verse they placed them into brackets so the reader knew.

Secondly, who created the NWT? Jehovah WItnesses. So yes they had a bias and an agenda. I don't think the contemporary versions have an agenda to mislead Christians, I do believe there is an agenda for profit though.

:jesus:

 

I asked a JW once about this text and why they translated it "a god" and his reply was that the Bible speaks of many gods. I think he had in mind the verse from 1 Corinthians 8:5

To which I reminded him that this was a reference to false gods. Was he saying then that John was calling Jesus a false god? He didn't answer. But the JW argument goes something like this, "If Jesus is called the SON of God, how then can he be God as well?" My question in response to that is usually, "Jesus also called himself the son of man. Does this mean that he he therefore cannot be man?"

It is well to realise also when speaking with JW's the purpose of John's gospel. It was partly a response to the gnostics of his time who denied that Jesus was come in the flesh. Therefore the heresy that the early church had to contend wiith was not that Jesus was not God, but whether he was indeed MAN.

So John was not concerned so much to prove that Jesus was God. Which makes these verses in John chapter 1 even more remarkable. For we read that he was indeed THE WORD of God and as the word of God was of necessity God himself. For how can we conceive God's word as being separate from God? Just as I cannot conceive my words as being separate from myself. My words are part of me.

Jesus therefore is the WORD MADE FLESH. God's word made man. The divine coming into the world of man and clothed in flesh as man. He is the very heart and mind of God Himself.

The truth is that the so called Jehovah's witnesses cannot get round the fact that however they translate John chapter one they cannot separate the WORD from GOD. For however you translate it, it must always literally be translated "The word was God". To translate it "the word was a god" is a bad and clumsy translation. Anyway, where else in the New Testament do you find Jesus referred to as "a god"? For there is but One God. Of course the doctrine of the trinity cannot be understood. Someone said once, "What man invents, man understands". Be sure that no man invented the Trinity. The fact of three persons yet one God.

ps: It is also useful to remember this when talking to JW's. Their name is taken from the OT text in Isaiah 43:10

I always turn to the NT words that Jesus spoke to his disciples in Acts 1:8

The reason why Christ's witnesses received the nickname "Christian" was`because`they were always witnessing for Christ. Always talking about him. JW's on the other hand gave "themselves" that high folluting name.

 

If you know Jesus IS God give an AMEN!!:thumbs:

 

Good stuff Grahame :thumbsup: Thanks for the input.

 

John 1 is only 1 problem with the NWT. A good description can be found HERE.

 

Another thing that JW's teach is that only the 144,000 are born again. Every other Jehovah's Witness does not need to be born again and so does not need the holy spirit (which according to them is a life force used by Jehovah and not the 3rd person of the trinity who is responsible for the new birth)
I usually ask the JW who comes to my door if they are born again, knowing what they will answer. They will probably say something on the lines that they do not need to be. For that is reserved for those 144,000 who will go to heaven. They will also probably quote a verse of scripture which says that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdon of heaven.
I then point them to the scripture found in Romans chapter 8.

Then I tell them that if they are not born again and therefore have not the Spirit of Christ then this scripture says that they are none of his.

We must of course remember that they are not the enemy. But they are the dupes of the enemy the devil. For he we are told has "blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." (2 Cor 4:4)
We must therefore witness to them in love. I knew an old hyper Calvinist who used to say about the JW's, "I love to get them in here. I make mincemeat of them". That is the wrong attitude to take. Remember that it is only by the grace of God that we can see these things ourselves.

 

More correctly, they believe that there will only be 144,000 in heaven, and the rest of the "righteous" are trying to earn their place in paradise here on earth, after all us non-JW's are annihilated.

 

Yes agreed. But those 144,000 are the only ones to be born again. That was my point. As you can see from my post I mentioned that also

 

Sorry. Now I see.