Who are the “other sheep” of John 10:16? (For Jehovah's Witnesses)

[Keiw]

Apparently, you didn't look carefully, Keiw ... it is indeed ho theos

View attachment 64445

2Cor 4:4 The ( Ho) god( Theos= how that paragraph begins--Otherwise in your reasoning it would start-The God capitol G.

 

[Aunty Jane]

If your reasoning is correct then 2Cor 4:4 would start-The God capitol G.

The use of capital letters is misleading, because there is no upper and lower case in Greek….so using capital ”G” when the definite article is missing is mistranslation.

It isn’t as if they do not know the meaning of the word “theos” as is demonstrated in this one verse….it’s the use of the capital letter that reinforces the meaning…in how they render these two persons with one descriptor, but speaking about two entirely different entities.

“in whose case the god (ho theos) of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God (ho theos). (NASB)

”ho theos” is used twice in that verse…once to describe “THE god” of this world….and Christ who is the image of THE God, “ho theos”….so this demonstrates that the translators know which is which.

We see this again in John 10:31-36…
”The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.” (theos, not ho theos) Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I ’? If he called them gods, (theos) to whom the word of God (ho theos) came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’ (ho theos)? (NASB)

The use of the capital “G” is again misleading. The Jews never accused Jesus of being “God“ but of claiming that God was his Father. (John 5:18) Anxious to pin a charge of blasphemy on him they resorted to distorting the truth.
If Jehovah himself can call human judges “gods” (theos) then the meaning of the word is dictated by context and the definite article. It’s amazing what a capital letter or even a misplaced comma can do to change the meaning of a sentence….
Relying on biased translation is a mistake….we should do our own homework. Just look these verses up in a Greek Interlinear…..

 

[Berean]

2Cor 4:4 The ( Ho) god( Theos= how that paragraph begins--Otherwise in your reasoning it would start-The God capitol G.

The capitalizations are done by the translators, they're are not in the original. Just like "other" is not in 1 Col. 1:16

 

[Keiw]

The use of capital letters is misleading, because there is no upper and lower case in Greek….so using capital ”G” when the definite article is missing is mistranslation.

It isn’t as if they do not know the meaning of the word “theos” as is demonstrated in this one verse….it’s the use of the capital letter that reinforces the meaning…in how they render these two persons with one descriptor, but speaking about two entirely different entities.

“in whose case the god (ho theos) of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God (ho theos). (NASB)

”ho theos” is used twice in that verse…once to describe “THE god” of this world….and Christ who is the image of THE God, “ho theos”….so this demonstrates that the translators know which is which.

We see this again in John 10:31-36…
”The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.” (theos, not ho theos) Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I ’? If he called them gods, (theos) to whom the word of God (ho theos) came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’ (ho theos)? (NASB)

The use of the capital “G” is again misleading. The Jews never accused Jesus of being “God“ but of claiming that God was his Father. (John 5:18) Anxious to pin a charge of blasphemy on him they resorted to distorting the truth.
If Jehovah himself can call human judges “gods” (theos) then the meaning of the word is dictated by context and the definite article. It’s amazing what a capital letter or even a misplaced comma can do to change the meaning of a sentence….
Relying on biased translation is a mistake….we should do our own homework. Just look these verses up in a Greek Interlinear…..

There is one God to all the Father( 1 Cor 8:6) --proves trinity religionssssssssssssssssssss are full of it. There is only 1 God.
Isaiah 44:6--I am YHVH(Jehovah) beside ME( not we or us) there is no other God-- trinitarians stop using your altered translations--its 100% fact all using them will LOSE.

 

[Keiw]

The capitalizations are done by the translators, they're are not in the original. Just like "other" is not in 1 Col. 1:16

ALL translations with Gods name removed against his will are misleading all to LOSE.

 

[Berean]

yet Jehovah/Yahweh is “THE God” of Jesus and his disciples…the only God that the Jews were told to serve.

Correction, Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees when He spoke those words.

 

[Berean]

ALL translations with Gods name removed against his will are misleading all to LOSE.

Keiw, try and stay on topic.

 

[shepherdsword]

What do you do with 2 Corinthians 4:4, where Satan is referred to as "ho theos"?

View attachment 64390

This is similar to the Hebrew equivalent of "elohim" where it was used in Ps 82:6 to convey it to those to whom the word came. The important thing as it is with elohim, is context. In Jn 1:1 it clearly refers to the creator. "all things were made by him" and equality with the Father " the Word with God and the Word was God". In 2 Cor 4:4 is used as a pagan reference similar to the Athenian discourse in Acts 17. The first three rules of interpretation 1) context 2) context 3) context


Here is Jesus' quotation of the verse using "Theoi" (plural)in Greek



AT Robertson's take on it:


Vincent's take:

 

[Aunty Jane]

@shepherdsword both of those “takes” on the meaning of the scriptures mentioned are opinions….like scholars, they are a dime a dozen….

To render “world” as “age” is misleading when we research the meaning of the word used there…”aiōn”

It means……

1. “for ever, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity
2. the worlds, universe
3. period of time, age“ (Strongs)

So seeking to find a word that suits a translators own personal interpretation is not a good reason to accept it at face value…..how is this word used in other parts of the Bible?
It is translated as “age” in many verses as the context demonstrates it should, but in other verses, “age” (as we understand that word in English) does not fit with the context at all.

e.g. Mark 11:14….NASB
He said to it, “May no one ever G165 eat fruit from you again!” And His disciples were listening.

Luke 1:33….NASB
”and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, G165 and His kingdom will have no end.”

Acts 3:21…NASB…
”whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient G165 time. G165”

Rom 12:2…NASB…
“And do not be conformed to this world, G165 but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.”

As for the second “take”…I put little store in the rabbinical writings as they were written after Jesus finished his earthly course, by those who did not genuinely serve the true God.

I put those writings on a par with the Catholic catechism. They were written by “faithful” Jews, but faithful only to their own religious system which Jesus condemned. (Matt 15:7-9) Look at what was written! Absolute nonsense….
They are not even worth a second look if we want to serve the same God that Jesus did. (Acts 4:27)

 

[Keiw]

Keiw, try and stay on topic.

i explained exactly who they are-NONE using altered translations know Gods truth.

 

[Berean]

i explained exactly who they are-NONE using altered translations know Gods truth.

Again, try and stay on topic. I swear sometimes I think you're a bot.

 

[shepherdsword]

@shepherdsword both of those “takes” on the meaning of the scriptures mentioned are opinions….like scholars, they are a dime a dozen….

To render “world” as “age” is misleading when we research the meaning of the word used there…”aiōn”

It means……

1. “for ever, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity
2. the worlds, universe
3. period of time, age“ (Strongs)

So seeking to find a word that suits a translators own personal interpretation is not a good reason to accept it at face value…..how is this word used in other parts of the Bible?
It is translated as “age” in many verses as the context demonstrates it should, but in other verses, “age” (as we understand that word in English) does not fit with the context at all.

e.g. Mark 11:14….NASB
He said to it, “May no one ever G165 eat fruit from you again!” And His disciples were listening.

Luke 1:33….NASB
”and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, G165 and His kingdom will have no end.”

Acts 3:21…NASB…
”whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient G165 time. G165”

Rom 12:2…NASB…
“And do not be conformed to this world, G165 but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.”

As for the second “take”…I put little store in the rabbinical writings as they were written after Jesus finished his earthly course, by those who did not genuinely serve the true God.

I put those writings on a par with the Catholic catechism. They were written by “faithful” Jews, but faithful only to their own religious system which Jesus condemned. (Matt 15:7-9) Look at what was written! Absolute nonsense….
They are not even worth a second look if we want to serve the same God that Jesus did. (Acts 4:27)

I think the point of the verse is to show that satan still power to deceive and enslave whether that's this present age or this planet, I do not think it is assigning some sort of divine role to him.