A Grossly Misleading Translation (New World
Translation)
John 1:1, which reads "In the beginning was
the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God," is shockingly
mistranslated, "Originally the Word was, and the Word was with God,
and the Word was a god," in a New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures,
published under the auspices of Jehovah's Witnesses.
Since my name is used and our Manual
Grammar of the Greek New Testament is quoted on page 744 to seek to
justify their translation I am making this statement.
The translation suggested in our Grammar for
the disputed passage is, "the Word was deity." Moffatt's rendering is
"the Word was divine." William's translation is, "the Word was God Himself."
Each translation reflects the dominant idea in the Greek. For, whenever
an article does not precede a noun in Greek, that noun can either be
considered as emphasizing the character, nature, essence or quality
of a person or thing, as theos (God) does in John 1:1, or it can be
translated in certain contexts as indefinite, as they have done. But
of all the scholars in the world, as far as we know, none have translated
this verse as Jehovah's Witnesses have.
If the Greek article occurred with both Word
and God in John 1:1 the implication would be that they are one and the
same person, absolutely identical. But John affirmed that "the Word
was with (the) God" (the definite article preceding each noun), and
in so writing he indicated his belief that they are distinct and separate
personalities. Then John next stated that the Word was God, i.e., of
the same family or essence that characterizes the Creator. Or, in other
words, that both are of the same nature, and the nature is the highest
in existence, namely divine.
Examples where the noun in the predicate does
not have an article, as in the above verse, are: John 4:24, "God is
spirit," (not a spirit); I John 4:16, "God is love," (not a love); I
John 1:5, "God is light," (not a light); and Matthew 13:39, "the reapers
are angels," i.e. they are the type of beings known as angels. In each
instance the noun in the predicate was used to describe some quality
or characteristics of the subject, whether as to nature or type.
The apostle John in the context of the introduction
to his gospel is pulling all the stops out of language to portray not
only the deity of Christ but also His equality with the Father. He states
that the Word was in the beginning, that He was with God, that He was
God and that all creation came into existence through Him and that not
even one thing exists which was not created by Christ. What else could
be said that John did not say? In John 1:18 he explained that Christ
had been so intimate with the Father that He was in His bosom and that
He came to earth to exhibit or portray God. But if we had no other statement
from John except that which is found in John 14:9, "He that has seen
me has seen the Father," that would be enough to satisfy the seeking
soul that Christ and God are the same in essence and that both are divine
and equal in nature.
Besides, the whole tenor of New Testament
revelation points in this direction. Compare Paul's declaration in Colossians
1:19, for instance: "that all the divine fullness should dwell in Him,"
or the statement in Hebrews 1:3, "He is the reflection of God's glory
and the perfect representation of His being, and continues to uphold
the universe by His mighty word." (Williams translation). And note the
sweeping, cosmic claim recorded in Matthew 28:19, "All authority has
been given to me in heaven and earth."
And, if we contrast with that the belittling
implication that Christ was only a god, do we not at once detect the
discord? Does not such a conception conflict with the New Testament
message both in whole and in part? Why, if John, in the midst of the
idolatry of his day, had made such a statement would not the first century
hearers and readers have gotten a totally inadequate picture of Christ,
who we believe, is the Creator of the universe and the only Redeemer
of humanity?
Julius Robert Mantey, A.B., Thd.D., PH.D.,
D.D.
{ Back To Previous
Page }
