Does God have a Name?

alan ford

Well-known member
did not base the NWT rendering of John 1:1 on some seance Greber had. Obviously, though, that is what the enemies of truth are trying to present and you are right there with them.
Did I ever say they were? I brought up a little known fact. And of course you will call me the enemy of the truth. :rolleyes: But you will avoid the fact that they still quoted him for decades, knowingly. :cautious:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God (τὸν Θεόν) , and the Word was a god (theos). John 1:1
There's no article "τὸν" in John 1:1, nor 1:18. Θεόν (Theon) and Θεός (Theos) is the same word. Just a different case. Koine Greek had 5 different cases. Θεός is the nominative case of the greek word God, while Θεόν is the accusative form of Θεός, meaning it is the object of the verb, the thing being acted upon. Both Θεός and Θεόν are translated as "God", one is simply doing the action of the verb (Θεός) the other being acted upon (Θεόν).

Here is the breakdown of cases for "Theos":
  • Nominative: Theos - Θεός
  • Genitive: Theou - Θεοῦ
  • Vocative: Thee - Θεέ
  • Dative: Theō - Θεῷ
  • Accusative: Theon - Θεόν
It's because of this ambiguity (no article) that trinitarians could make their claim. But I am not stuck on words as you seem to be. There are plenty of other scriptures which to me are enough to prove that there's a difference between Father and Son, that they are not the same being.
Anyway, I don't have any issues with this. I believe Jesus is the Son of God, and is subordinate to him.


edit: fixed ablative to vocative
.
 
Last edited:

BroRando

Member
Here is the breakdown of cases for "Theos":
  • Nominative: Theos - Θεός
  • Genitive: Theou - Θεοῦ
  • Ablative: Theou - Θεοῦ
  • Dative: Theō - Θεῷ
  • Accusative: Theon - Θεόν
It's because of this ambiguity (no article) that trinitarians could make their claim. But I am not stuck on words as you seem to be.
Maybe you should be stuck on words because they have meanings. Since these cases are interchangeable as you claim to be making, you can easily show an example of the Accusative: Theon - Θεόν is applied to Jesus Christ.

Theon - Θεόν is NEVER applied to Jesus Christ in the Bible, not one single verse ever, nothing, nada, doesn't exist. So are you now a denier of Jesus Christ, all of a sudden the words of Christ are meaningless? I think not... but let's see your proof of claim that Jesus is called (
Θεόν) - not going to happen in this lifetime or the next. I got time.

Make your case... I'm showing what Greek Scholars refuse to admit. That (theos) can be rendered in the feminine sense (a god).

Strong's Concordance
theos: God, a god
Original Word: θεός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine; Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: theos
Phonetic Spelling: (theh'-os)
Definition: God, a god
Usage: (a) God, (b) a god, generally.
 

Carl

Well-known member
After reading these exchanges, my take away is that Alan believes Jesus is the son of Jehovah, not his equal… and that the WT was wrong to continuously quote a known spiritist. By doing so, they have given Jehovah’s enemies ammo to attack the WT and the NWT. Just another example of the WT being careless in who’s work they quote.
 

alan ford

Well-known member
Maybe you should be stuck on words because they have meanings. Since these cases are interchangeable as you claim to be making, you can easily show an example of the Accusative: Theon - Θεόν is applied to Jesus Christ.

Theon - Θεόν is NEVER applied to Jesus Christ in the Bible, not one single verse ever, nothing, nada, doesn't exist. So are you now a denier of Jesus Christ, all of a sudden the words of Christ are meaningless? I think not... but let's see your proof of claim that Jesus is called (
Θεόν) - not going to happen in this lifetime or the next. I got time.

Make your case... I'm showing what Greek Scholars refuse to admit. That (theos) can be rendered in the feminine sense (a god).

Strong's Concordance
theos: God, a god
Original Word: θεός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine; Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: theos
Phonetic Spelling: (theh'-os)
Definition: God, a god
Usage: (a) God, (b) a god, generally.
I am not stuck on words because I consider the context and I am not jumping thru hoops to prove words don't mean what they mean which you are doing. And I am also not sure you understand what cases are. The change in spelling does not alter the meaning but reflects the grammatical structure of the sentence. In my native language we have 7 cases so I do have an idea. And they all mean the same thing even though they are written differently. Here is the example of the word which means "God":

nominativ - Bog
genitiv - Boga
dativ - Bogu
akuzativ - Boga
vokativ - Bože
instrumental - Bogom
lokativ - Bogu

Make your case... I'm showing what Greek Scholars refuse to admit. That (theos) can be rendered in the feminine sense (a god).
There's such thing as grammatical gender in other languages, so don't confuse if the noun is feminine that the object spoken about is also feminine. Feminine noun doesn't mean that the object spoken about is feminine. Whether it's masculine or feminine depends on the word that it is used in relation to.

For example in my language we have 3 grammatical genders: Masculine, feminine and neuter. For example, the word "divine" can be masculine, feminine and neutral, depending on context. If you want to say "God's glory" you would say Božja (feminine) slava but if you wanted to say "God's wrath" it would be Božji (masculine) gnjev. There is also a neuter gender: if you want to say "divine right" it is Božje (neuter) pravo. All of these are from the word "Bog" (always maculine) which means both "God" and "a god", depending on context.

In case of Θεόν (Theon) the acusative asks the question, whom or what? Θεόν (Theon) is just a conjugation of the word Θεός (Theos), which is the root word. In case of John 1:1 it says "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with (whom, what) God."
In John 1:6 it uses genitive case (by whom, by what): "There was a man sent from (by who, by what, genitive) God (Θεοῦ - Theou)"
I hope this clarifies it for you.
 

alan ford

Well-known member
After reading these exchanges, my take away is that Alan believes Jesus is the son of Jehovah, not his equal… and that the WT was wrong to continuously quote a known spiritist. By doing so, they have given Jehovah’s enemies ammo to attack the WT and the NWT. Just another example of the WT being careless in who’s work they quote.
Exactly. Thanks :)
 

BroRando

Member
In case of Θεόν (Theon) the acusative asks the question, whom or what? Θεόν (Theon) is just a conjugation of the word Θεός (Theos), which is the root word. In case of John 1:1 it says "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with (whom, what) God."
The trinitarians have no leg to stand on at all. So my point is that trinitarians will raise false flags. The point is this:

In the First instance of God in John 1:1 the Greek word for God is Θεόν a term that never refers to Jesus. To make this as simple as possible, this proves to trinitarians that they are not the same-same nor co-equal or co-existent. Will they believe it? NOPE. They are engulfed by wicked spirits, so reasoning with them is nearly impossible. You are already thinking like them of which you are going right along with them. The (whom and what) is already given in the understanding the Greek of which you cannot SEE. For at least at this time... but the closer we get to the conclusion of the last days the demons from here on out will simply become more fierce and active until they are abyssed.

Now, if Θεόν (Theon) is just a conjugation of the word Θεός (Theos) then it would not exist at all. There would be no need. Obvious for those who look up the Greek in this matter can SEE that Θεόν simply doesn't exist in John 1:1c nor is the Holy Spirit called by the Greek title Θεόν (Theon). Like the trinity, it simply does not exist in Jehovah's Word.

I have no need to persuade those who are my brothers or sisters. Only those whom are lost or not of the fold and it takes so much effort. Scripture that gives insight to the right hearted is listed below.

  • In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God τὸν Θεόν, and the Word was a god Θεός .

Since the feminine noun of theos was invoked by with-holding the definite article by the Apostle John, a god can also be rendered godlike in John 1:1c and who is like God?

Take Care.
 
Last edited:

alan ford

Well-known member
The trinitarians have no leg to stand on at all. So my point is that trinitarians will raise false flags. The point is this:

In the First instance of God in John 1:1 the Greek word for God is Θεόν a term that never refers to Jesus. To make this as simple as possible, this proves to trinitarians that they are not the same-same nor co-equal or co-existent. Will they believe it? NOPE. They are engulfed by wicked spirits, so reasoning with them is nearly impossible. You are already thinking like them of which you are going right along with them. The (whom and what) is already given in the understanding the Greek of which you cannot SEE. For at least at this time... but the closer we get to the conclusion of the last days the demons from here on out will simply become more fierce and active until they are abyssed.

Now, if Θεόν (Theon) is just a conjugation of the word Θεός (Theos) then it would not exist at all. There would be no need. Obvious for those who look up the Greek in this matter can SEE that Θεόν simply doesn't exist in John 1:1c nor is the Holy Spirit called by the Greek title Θεόν (Theon). Like the trinity, it simply does not exist in Jehovah's Word.

I have no need to persuade those who are my brothers or sisters. Only those whom are lost or not of the fold and it takes so much effort. Scripture that gives insight to the right hearted is listed below.

  • In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God τὸν Θεόν, and the Word was a god Θεός .

Since the feminine noun of theos was invoked by with-holding the definite article by the Apostle John, a god can also be rendered godlike in John 1:1c

Take Care.
Tell me why is there no separate entry in the concordance for word Θεόν but it's rather under the same number as Θεός, which is the root word? I'll tell you why: because Θεόν is not the root word, same as Θεῷ and Θεοῦ are not root words but conjugations (or is declensions the right word?) Here is the example of how the word Christ is conjugated:
  • Nominative: Χριστός (Christos)
  • Genitive: Χριστοῦ (Christou)
  • Vocative: Χριστέ (Christe)
  • Dative: Χριστῷ (Christōi)
  • Accusative: Χριστόν (Christon)
As for trinitarians, I'm not sure where you get the idea that anyone here is a trinitarian :unsure: In case you didn't know everyone here was (or still is) associated with the org.

Take care too.
 
Last edited:

Ms_ladyblue

Well-known member
For a long time, the Bible Students and Jehovah's Witnesses used the Bibles that were available, mostly the King James and the American Standard. JWs recognized the need for better translations to use in the field and that gave rise to the NWT. The NWT clarified things like hell, which popular translations mixed up with sheol, hades, Ghenna and Tartarus. Also, parousia is always rendered as "presence" and not sometimes as "coming," like some translations. My comments today about "peace and security" relate to the NWT, as most translations say "peace and safety." But the official lingo of the UN is always "peace and security." "Peace and safety" does not resonate at all. With the latest 2013 version, it has been further simplified for clarity and ease of translation into other languages. I use the NWT 99% and only consult other translations to check the variants.
I prefer the NWT Reference Bible 1984 translation. Don’t you think that one is more accurate?
 

alan ford

Well-known member
In regards to God's name and WT, I appreciated this brochure when I was younger. The very opening of it made an impact on me. It was in circulation for a long time.

Quote from the brochure
“A study of the word ‘name’ in the O[ld] T[estament] reveals how much it means in Hebrew. The name is no mere label, but is significant of the real personality of him to whom it belongs.”
Doing a study on God's name will reveal what kind of person He is. Jesus embodied all of His qualities in the form of a man. (Col. 2:9). And all who witnessed him have also witnessed Jehovah. This is why Jesus could say "I have made your name known to them". (John 17:26) or "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father." (John 14:9)
Jesus didn't need to tell them that God's name was Jehovah. He showed them who He is.
 
Last edited:

Charming Primrose

Well-known member
I prefer the NWT Reference Bible 1984 translation. Don’t you think that one is more accurate?
I was using the 'silver sword' for a while, but something just didn't feel right about it. Couldn't put my finger on it. Yes the 1984 translation is the one I prefer.
I now wish I had a large print copy of it lol my eyes aren't as good as they were 20+yrs ago 😆
 
Last edited:

BroRando

Member
Tell me why is there no separate entry in the concordance for word Θεόν but it's rather under the same number as Θεός, which is the root word?
Trinitarian propaganda. All parts are the same and co-equal. NOPE!
  • Nominative: Theos - Θεός
  • Genitive: Theou - Θεοῦ
  • Vocative: Thee - Θεέ
  • Dative: Theō - Θεῷ
  • Accusative: Theon - Θεόν

The Accusative: Theon - Θεόν doesn't necessarily need an article because Accusative is its natural state. With or without an article it is in the accusative masculine noun. This Greek title is in the first instance of God at John 1:1
  • In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God τὸν Θεόν,
Notice Θεός is in its natural state is in nominative which means it's natural state is a feminine noun, NOT necessarily a feminine gender unless it is being directed towards false gods. So Θεός in its natural state is in the nominative feminine noun. a god
  • and the Word was a god Θεός.
Here is the Strong's Concordance but it is not accurate. Why? Because Θεός in its natural state is a feminine noun (a god) but also can be put in the in the accusative masculine noun state? How? By adding the definite article ho. Simply by with-holding the definite article (ho) which the Apostle John did in John 1:1 leaves Θεός in its natural state of being a nominative feminine noun (a god)

Strong's Concordance
theos: God, a god
Original Word: θεός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine; Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: theos
Phonetic Spelling: (theh'-os)
Definition: God, a god
Usage: (a) God, (b) a god, generally.

SO their is a hierarchy for the cases
  • Accusative: Theon - Θεόν
  • Accusative: Theos - Θεός
  • Nominative: Theos - Θεός
  • Dative: Theō - Θεῷ
  • Vocative: Thee - Θεέ
  • Genitive: Theou - Θεοῦ
Trinitarian Greek Scholars are BIASED and proclaim these different cases are co-equal and are the SAME. NO! NOT TRUE!

Let's take a look at the Accusative: Theos - Θεός - this is not the natural state of the nominative feminine noun (a god).
Case and point - In answer Thomas said to him: “My Lord and my God!” According to Greek we are reading a paraphrase scripture. (Was shorten) Thomas actually said "the Lord of me and the God of me."

Does this mean Jesus is 'the God'? No, for Jesus stated 'the Father is GREATER than I am" So whether you like it or not Jehovah is the top of the hierarchy and answers to nobody. Also, Aaron can also call Moses “My Lord and my God!” (Exodus 7:1) Does that make Moses (the God)? Of course not!

SO the claim Jesus is Jehovah is void and deceptive. Jehovah as 'the God' τὸν Θεόν is Greater than Jesus as 'the God' ὁ Θεός.
  • among whom the god (ὁ Θεός) of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through.
Not the same... All the Best!
 
Last edited:

alan ford

Well-known member
Trinitarian propaganda. All parts are the same and co-equal. NOPE!
Trinitarian Greek Scholars are BIASED and proclaim these different cases are co-equal and are the SAME. NO! NOT TRUE!
Your argument makes no sense. This is not about being biased or not. It’s just simple grammar rules of the language.
It’s essential to understand the declension of cases if you want to master the grammar of many languages, Koine Greek included.

Useful to read:

SO the claim Jesus is Jehovah is void and deceptive. Jehovah as 'the God' τὸν Θεόν is Greater than Jesus as 'the God' ὁ Θεός.
Where did I claim this? I have a feeling you haven't read anything I wrote...
Anyway, take care.
 

BroRando

Member
Your argument makes no sense. This is not about being biased or not. It’s just simple grammar rules of the language.
It’s essential to understand the declension of cases if you want to master the grammar of many languages, Koine Greek included.

Useful to read:


Where did I claim this? I have a feeling you haven't read anything I wrote...
Anyway, take care.
Your claim is that it makes no difference which case of theos a person uses.

Case in point again: It matters.
  • among whom the god (ὁ Θεός) of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through.


Only Jehovah is the Revealer of Secrets to give one insight to these matters. Others reading this are beginning to SEE.
The Accusative: Theon - Θεόν doesn't necessarily need an article because Accusative is its natural state. With or without an article it is in the accusative masculine noun. This Greek title is in the first instance of God at John 1:1
  • In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God τὸν Θεόν,
Notice Θεός is in its natural state is in nominative which means it's natural state is a feminine noun, NOT necessarily a feminine gender unless it is being directed towards false gods. So Θεός in its natural state is in the nominative feminine noun. a god
  • and the Word was a god Θεός.
Here is the Strong's Concordance but it is not accurate. Why? Because Θεός in its natural state is a feminine noun (a god) but also can be put into the accusative masculine noun state. How? By adding the definite article ho. Simply by with-holding the definite article (ho) which the Apostle John did in John 1:1 leaves Θεός in its natural state of being a nominative feminine noun (a god)

Strong's Concordance
theos: God, a god
Original Word: θεός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine; Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: theos
Phonetic Spelling: (theh'-os)
Definition: God, a god
Usage: (a) God, (b) a god, generally.

Have a nice day sir...
 

BroRando

Member
If you desire more information I have written about these matters in an e-book.

The Hidden Treasure of John 1:1​

The truth about John 1:1 has been long hidden from the masses. Why is learning this scripture vital to your spiritual health? Because words matter! In Greek there are two different words for God. Also, using a definite article emphasizes the subject spoken about. First instance is ton theon which means the God and the second instance is theos which means a god.

How does John 1:1 read with a literal translation?


“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and a god was the Word.”

Jesus is never referred to as the theon because Jesus was begotten and came into existence. Therefore, the Apostle John used the nominative title theos which means a god referring to the Word’s divinity and godlike qualities.

1975 “and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word” – Das Evangelium nach Johnnes, by Siegfried Schulz, Göttingen, Germany

1978: “and godlike sort was the Logos” – Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider, Berlin
 

kirmmy

Well-known member
I was using the 'siler sword' for a while, but something just didn't feel right about it. Couldn't put my finger on it. Yes the 1984 translation is the one I prefer.
I now wish I had a large print copy of it lol my eyes aren't as good as they were 20+yrs ago 😆
Try this one and see what you think.


Plenty of interesting footnotes on word meaning, and they respect and honor God's name. It's as if the Witnesses created a truly honest translation. :) They based their Bible more on the Septuagint than the Masoretic text. And thusly were able to clear up a lot of questions about the scriptures. And probably produced a few in the process. :)
 

Charming Primrose

Well-known member
Try this one and see what you think.


Plenty of interesting footnotes on word meaning, and they respect and honor God's name. It's as if the Witnesses created a truly honest translation. :) They based their Bible more on the Septuagint than the Masoretic text. And thusly were able to clear up a lot of questions about the scriptures. And probably produced a few in the process. :)
Thank you. I will check it out 😊
 

alan ford

Well-known member
Your claim is that it makes no difference which case of theos a person uses.

What I am claiming is that which one is used is determined by the structure of the sentence. I even gave you examples in another language. I gave you links to grammar lessons. It’s very simple.
I’m not sure whether your reading comprehension is that bad or you’re deliberately mischaracterizing what I said but looks bad on you in any case.
 

JMJLG

Well-known member
Just keep in mind BroRando that no one has brought more reproach or dishonor on Jehovah's name than Jehovah's Witnesses' leadership. And they ain't done yet.

I remember years ago , when Robert did this brilliant video on the name of Jehovah . What it meant , and how we can can sure that Jehovah is how it should be pronounced , using ancient Hebrew names that use the syllables YHWH . In more recent years , some archeologists , and Rabbi`s have come to the very same conclusion , having unearthed some very old writings .
 
Top