A Question for Jehovah's Witnesses

[RedFan]

2 cor 4:4 proves god small g is correct to the one not called Ton Theon.

I don't know what you are looking at that has "Ton Theon" in it. Can you share a link? Meanwhile, perhaps you can explain how 2 Cor. 4:4 proves anything relevant, by addressing my post:

Meanwhile, your reference to 2 Cor. 4:4 is not an instance of "Ton Theon" and "Theon" taking on definite and indefinite meanings for God in the same paragraph. (I assume you meant to anglicize it "Tou Theou" and "Theou.") You deleted an article. The verse has ὁ θεὸς ("ho theos," since we are anglicizing) and τοῦ Θεοῦ ("tou theou"). Articles both times! That distinguishes it from John 1:1. The issue in John 1:1 is how to interpret the unarticulated Θεὸς. 2 Cor. 4:4 doesn't have an unarticulated θεὸς. So it sheds no light on the issue.

 

[Keiw]

Would you like to actually learn the grammar, and why these words have different endings?

Much love!

i know 100% Ton Theon = God, Theon = god when in the same paragraph.

 

[Keiw]

I don't know what you are looking at that has "Ton Theon" in it. Can you share a link? Meanwhile, perhaps you can explain how 2 Cor. 4:4 proves anything relevant, by addressing my post:

Its another way in Greek Ton Theon=Ho Theos

 

[RedFan]

i know 100% Ton Theon = God, Theon = god when in the same paragraph.

But it's ὁ θεὸς ("ho theos") and τοῦ Θεοῦ ("tou theou")! That's what 2 Cor. 4:4 says. Show us a Greek NT that says otherwise.

 

[Keiw]

Would you like to actually learn the grammar, and why these words have different endings?

Much love!

Greek translated to English symbols- One is Theon, one is Theos.

 

[RedFan]

Greek translated to English symbols- One is Theon, one is Theos.

Aren't you aware that the same Greek word will have different endings to designate the case of the noun?

 

[Keiw]

But it's ὁ θεὸς ("ho theos") and τοῦ Θεοῦ ("tou theou")! That's what 2 Cor. 4:4 says. Show us a Greek NT that says otherwise.

2Cor 4:4 =among whom the god- Tou Theou because the is there at 2 Cor 4:4--The is not there where the word is called Theou. Ho Theos= The God, The word was not called The God. Satan wasnt called The God either, just god, but the preceded it at 2 Cor 4:4.

 

[RedFan]

2Cor 4:4 =among whom the god- Tou Theou because the is there at 2 Cor 4:4--The is not there where the word is called Theou. Ho Theos= The God, The word was not called The God. Satan wasnt called The God either, just god, but the preceded it at 2 Cor 4:4.

The definite article "the" is in both, ὁ θεὸς ("ho theos") and τοῦ Θεοῦ ("tou theou"). Don't you understand that ὁ and tou both imply "the"? In Koine Greek the definite article has different endings to match the noun it is associated with, but in the genitive case ("of God") it isn't expressed.

 

[Keiw]

The definite article "the" is in both, ὁ θεὸς ("ho theos") and τοῦ Θεοῦ ("tou theou"). Don't you understand that ὁ and tou both imply "the"? In Koine Greek the definite article has different endings to match the noun it is associated with, but in the genitive case ("of God") it isn't expressed.

Reality--John 20:17, Rev 3:12, Psalm 45:7--Eph 1:3,17, 2 Cor 1:3, Col 1:3, 1 Pet 1:3--Jesus and the bible writers assure all-Jesus has a God, his Father. Fact= God does not have a God.

 

[marks]

i know 100% Ton Theon = God, Theon = god when in the same paragraph.

OK.

Much love!

 

[RedFan]

Reality--John 20:17, Rev 3:12, Psalm 45:7--Eph 1:3,17, 2 Cor 1:3, Col 1:3, 1 Pet 1:3--Jesus and the bible writers assure all-Jesus has a God, his Father. Fact= God does not have a God.

That isn't what I was discussing with you. I was discussing whether ὁ θεὸς can be a reference to "God" (as opposed to "god" or "a god"). You seem to think it cannot, based on 2 Cor. 4:4. Try explaining 2 Cor. 1:18 then!

Do you want to discuss Christology, or do you want to discuss the Greek language?

 

[marks]

The definite article "the" is in both, ὁ θεὸς ("ho theos") and τοῦ Θεοῦ ("tou theou"). Don't you understand that ὁ and tou both imply "the"? In Koine Greek the definite article has different endings to match the noun it is associated with, but in the genitive case ("of God") it isn't expressed.

Just for reference.

Most interpret "the god of this age" to be Satan, designated by ho theos.

Much love!

 

[Runningman]

Genesis 16:7-13 KJV
7) And the angel of the LORD found her by a fountain of water in the wilderness, by the fountain in the way to Shur.
8) And he said, Hagar, Sarai's maid, whence camest thou? and whither wilt thou go? And she said, I flee from the face of my mistress Sarai.
9) And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Return to thy mistress, and submit thyself under her hands.
10) And the angel of the LORD said unto her, I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude.
11) And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the LORD hath heard thy affliction.
12) And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.
13) And she called the name of the LORD that spake unto her, Thou God seest me: for she said, Have I also here looked after him that seeth me?

Hagar knew.

Genesis 22:15-17 KJV
15) And the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time,
16) And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:
17) That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;

Exodus 3:2-7 KJV
2) And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed.
3) And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt.
4) And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I.
5) And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.
6) Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.
7) And the LORD said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people which are in Egypt, and have heard their cry by reason of their taskmasters; for I know their sorrows;

Numbers 22:35 KJV
35) And the angel of the LORD said unto Balaam, Go with the men: but only the word that I shall speak unto thee, that thou shalt speak. So Balaam went with the princes of Balak.

Numbers 22:38 KJV
38) And Balaam said unto Balak, Lo, I am come unto thee: have I now any power at all to say any thing? the word that God putteth in my mouth, that shall I speak.

Judges 2:1 KJV
1) And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.

Bottom line is you have nothing explicit about Jesus pre-existing his birth. Just theology, doctrine, belief, etc. There are no Old Testament examples of Jesus saying or doing anything.

These are the first handful of references. I don't see any ambiguity. The Messenger of YHWH is in fact YHWH.

Much love!

No. The "angel of the Lord" is demonstrably not YHWH. The angel of the Lord and the LORD are having a conversation. This means they aren't the same person. Try again.

Zechariah 1
12Then the angel of the LORD said, “How long, O LORD of Hosts, will You withhold mercy from Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, with which You have been angry these seventy years?”

13So the LORD spoke kind and comforting words to the angel who was speaking with me.

 

[Keiw]

That isn't what I was discussing with you. I was discussing whether ὁ θεὸς can be a reference to "God" (as opposed to "god" or "a god"). You seem to think it cannot, based on 2 Cor. 4:4. Try explaining 2 Cor. 1:18 then!

Do you want to discuss Christology, or do you want to discuss the Greek language?

1:18 speaks of the true God.

 

[RedFan]

1:18 speaks of the true God.

Indeed. And the exact same phrase (ὁ θεὸς) in John 20:28 has the exact same meaning, wouldn't you agree?

 

[Runningman]

Indeed. And the exact same phrase (ὁ θεὸς) in John 20:28 has the exact same meaning, wouldn't you agree?

Where there are two mentions of the definitive God, the Father YHWH, and another god in the same context there is typically a distinction made in the Greek so it's clear one is God Almighty and the other isn't. This appears in John 1:1 and John 1:18 in some manuscripts. John 20:17 compared to John 20:28.

The God in 1 Cor. 1:18 and John 20:28 are not necessarily the same person where Jesus is in fact a human and obviously not God.

There are exceptions to these rules of thumb we like to use, too. The writers of the New Testament seemed to just use whatever word they wanted to, inconsistently sometimes, based on some reasoning that has just caused debate for centuries.

 

[RedFan]

Where there are two mentions of the definitive God, the Father YHWH, and another god in the same context there is typically a distinction made in the Greek so it's clear one is God Almighty and the other isn't. This appears in John 1:1 and John 1:18 in some manuscripts. John 20:17 compared to John 20:28.

The God in 1 Cor. 1:18 and John 20:28 are not necessarily the same person where Jesus is in fact a human and obviously not God.

There are exceptions to these rules of thumb we like to use, too. The writers of the New Testament seemed to just use whatever word they wanted to, inconsistently sometimes, based on some reasoning that has just caused debate for centuries.

Fair point insofar as context can imply a contrast between the two. But I don't see that going on in John 20:28.

 

[Runningman]

Fair point insofar as context can imply a contrast between the two. But I don't see that going on in John 20:28.

I really feel like the Bible may be more corrupted than we can possibly know. So much has been lost to time and there is precedent for a deliberate alteration to Biblical manuscripts. Apparently, it's extremely easy to turn the word "he" into "god." It literally takes just adding a line because scribes abbreviated some words to make copying texts easier.

1 Timothy 3:16 is an example of this. The KJV's textus receptus says "God appeared in the flesh" while most modern Bibles say "he appeared in the flesh." It is remarkably easy to dramatically change the meaning of word in this case by merely adding a line.

ΘC (“God”)— is the contracted form of ΘEOC which is what scribes would have written to save a bit of time. However, "he" is simply Ὅς. So all you need to do to change Ὅς to ΘC is simply add a line in the O or above the O. This happened in 1 Timothy 3:16.

Who is to say this didn't happen all over the Bible?

 

[RedFan]

Apparently, it's extremely easy to turn the word "he" into "god." It literally takes just adding a line because scribes abbreviated some words to make copying texts easier.

1 Timothy 3:16 is an example of this. The KJV's textus receptus says "God appeared in the flesh" while most modern Bibles say "he appeared in the flesh."

In the sixteenth century "God" was what the translators all saw. Tyndale's bible and Coverdale's bible, even the Geneva bible, follow KJV in using "God" rather than "he" here. Their choice may reflect their Trinitarian bent. And that's is scary too. I'd much rather distill theology from Scripture than distill Scripture from theology!

 

[Runningman]

I'd much rather distill theology from Scripture than distill Scripture from theology!

Me too.... if we can only figure out what the Scriptures are. The manuscripts don't even teach exactly the same things. lol so here we all are and no one really agrees with each other very often anymore.

Personally, I think the Old Testament is the best place to begin, but to each their own I guess.