by lilyflor 15 Replies latest watchtower bible
I have a copy of the The Diaglott published in 1942 by the WTBTS and John 1:1 says:
Greek word for word: "In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and a god was the Word."
English translation: "In the Beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God"
The Society here did not add the "a" before the last "God".
Question - Do you think that this would be proof enough for JWs that the WT has changed the bible?
lilyflor,
The Emphatic Diaglott was completed in 1864, when Charles T. Russell was only 12 years old and 15 years before the first issue of The Watchtower appeared. It was translated by Benjamin Wilson, a member of the Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith. The Society bought the translation and in 1902 had it printed by someone else and then in 1927 on its own presses. But the translation is the same as when Wilson produced it.
Frank
Interesting. I wonder if it would be the intentional understanding by John just to say Jesus was "a god"? In a few verses he calls Jesus the "only-begotten god in the bosom position of the Father"; that sounds like "a god."
Certainly, God the Father is not also the "only-begotten god in the bosom position of [himself]". Besides "begotten" has "created" written all over it as well.
The Trinity doctrine, therefore, as I see it, is clearly reaching. I'm glad I was raised a witness to at least not to have to deal with the false trinity doctrine.
JC
If the word printed is god, in what sense is the word god used?
If the word printed is god, in what sense is the word god used?
fjtoth: thank you for the background on the diaglott - so basically the Diaglott is just another bible translation "based on the various readings of the Vatican Manuscript 1209". I wish I knew what that meant - is the greek in the Diaglott the word for word greek in the Vatican Manuscript??
JCanon: Having been raised a witness, I am familiar with all the bible verses that do not support the trinity. after having left the witnesses I have become familiar with the bible verses that do support it.
lilyflor,
The Greek in the left hand column is that of Johann Jakob Griesbach. He compiled it from various manuscripts. The English in the right hand column is based on Griesbach, the Vatican Manuscript 1209 and the renderings of others.
As for "bible verses that do support" the Trinity, I would like to see them. I know of several verses that state God is One, but none that state he is Three. God says he has only one soul just as we do, not three. Additionally, all through the Bible -- thousands of times -- he speaks of himself as "I" and "me". Even trinitarian scholars acknowledge that the "us" in Genesis 1:26 and a very few other places simply means that God was addressing "the members of his heavenly court." (See the footnote on Genesis 1:26 in the New International Version Study Bible.) So, I would like to see just one Bible verse that states clearly that "the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods, but only one God."
Never do we speak of God as "they" or "them". Instead we call him "he" or "him", and the Bible speaks of him in the very same way -- thousands of times.
It's useless to argue that there are a few places where the Son is called God and the Holy Spirit is called God, when there are instances of where angels, Moses, and the judges of Israel are also called God, mainly because they spoke for God, they spoke in God's name and they spoke by God's authority just as Jesus does.
Frank
Obviously there is no verse that spells it out for you - it is all interpretation after all.
lilyflor,
I agree that the Trinity is based upon interpretation. But why do we need interpretation for plain statements? If the Bible says God is only One, why should we interpret that to mean God is not One Person, but Three Persons? If he constantly speaks of himself as "I" and "me", why should we interpret him to mean "we Three" and "us Three"? When Moses spoke to God face-to-face, it was Moses' one face to God's one face, not God's three faces, or was it?
Frank
Frank,
IMHO when the Bible (or any other book for that matter) says "blah, blah, blah" our experiences/worldviews are going to interpret those words to mean "a", "b", "c" or whatever to us. How can one argue another person's experience or views?
Personally, having been exposed only to the view "trinity is not true" for the last 25 years, seeing bible verses (don't remember which, would have to look it up) that can easily be interpreted as supporting the trinity, I found it fascinating. We all pick and choose which verses best confirm our reality/beliefs.
"to the believer no evidence is necessary, to the non-believer no evidence will suffice: - did I get that right?
