The doctrine of the divinity of Christ is the major dividing wall between historic Christianity and Jehovah's Witnesses. The Jehovah's Witnesses argue that Jesus is not divine, but is a created being. Perhaps you have had them come to your door with a list of their arguments of why Jesus is not God. One of the key Scriptures on this topic is John 1:1.
The NIV translates John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God."
In the Greek text, the passage looks like this: Eν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
Some JW's will appeal to this verse to try to make their case and generally their explaination goes like this:
Eν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
The words that are underlined are called "definite articles." In English, "the" is a definite article. So when I say, "I want the truck" I have a definite truck in mind. I don't want any truck, I want THE truck. An indefinite article in English is "a." So if I say, "I want a truck" I do not have a definite truck in mind. Any truck will do. So in the above passage we see, the logos, the logos, the theos, the logos (or , the Word, the Word, the God, the Word). The Jehovah Witness will point out that the verse literally reads, "In the beginning was THE Word and THE Word was with THE God and The Word was God. Thus, they will argue that the absense of the definite article for God at the end of the sentence demands an indefinite article. So, they say, the verse should read, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was A god.
For someone who is unfamiliar with Greek, this rationale would seem to make perfect sense. Of course, if the definite article is missing, it would mean its not referring to THE God, but a god. However, this is not how the Greek works. The absence of a definite article does not mandate the presence of an indefinite article. Moreover, the Jehovah's Witnesses neglect a linquistic rule known as Colwell's Rule. This rule argues that a definite predicate nominative has a definite article when it follows a copulative verb, but not when it precedes a copulative verb.
Without getting overly technical, in the Greek language, the word order is flexible. In English, the subject comes first, then the verb then the object or predicate nominative. So if I say, John is a teacher....John is the subject because it comes first, while "a teacher" is a predicate nominative" because it names the subject. However, in Greek, the subject can be at the end of the sentence because subjects, verbs, objects, etc. are identified by their roots, not by their location in the sentence.
So, to put it simply, the definite article is used or not used based on word order in some cases and is not always directly related to whether or not it is definite or indefinite.
So, in sum, the JW argument on John 1:1 is errant. The lack of a definite article does not mandate an indefinite article. The definite article is missing due to Greek grammatical rules, not because John was referring to Jesus as merely "a god." Dont allow a 2 minute Greek lesson from a Jehovah's Witness trick you into thinking that the Greek of John 1:1 supports their view that Jesus is not divine. It does not.
The NIV translates John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God."
In the Greek text, the passage looks like this: Eν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
Some JW's will appeal to this verse to try to make their case and generally their explaination goes like this:
Eν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
The words that are underlined are called "definite articles." In English, "the" is a definite article. So when I say, "I want the truck" I have a definite truck in mind. I don't want any truck, I want THE truck. An indefinite article in English is "a." So if I say, "I want a truck" I do not have a definite truck in mind. Any truck will do. So in the above passage we see, the logos, the logos, the theos, the logos (or , the Word, the Word, the God, the Word). The Jehovah Witness will point out that the verse literally reads, "In the beginning was THE Word and THE Word was with THE God and The Word was God. Thus, they will argue that the absense of the definite article for God at the end of the sentence demands an indefinite article. So, they say, the verse should read, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was A god.
For someone who is unfamiliar with Greek, this rationale would seem to make perfect sense. Of course, if the definite article is missing, it would mean its not referring to THE God, but a god. However, this is not how the Greek works. The absence of a definite article does not mandate the presence of an indefinite article. Moreover, the Jehovah's Witnesses neglect a linquistic rule known as Colwell's Rule. This rule argues that a definite predicate nominative has a definite article when it follows a copulative verb, but not when it precedes a copulative verb.
Without getting overly technical, in the Greek language, the word order is flexible. In English, the subject comes first, then the verb then the object or predicate nominative. So if I say, John is a teacher....John is the subject because it comes first, while "a teacher" is a predicate nominative" because it names the subject. However, in Greek, the subject can be at the end of the sentence because subjects, verbs, objects, etc. are identified by their roots, not by their location in the sentence.
So, to put it simply, the definite article is used or not used based on word order in some cases and is not always directly related to whether or not it is definite or indefinite.
So, in sum, the JW argument on John 1:1 is errant. The lack of a definite article does not mandate an indefinite article. The definite article is missing due to Greek grammatical rules, not because John was referring to Jesus as merely "a god." Dont allow a 2 minute Greek lesson from a Jehovah's Witness trick you into thinking that the Greek of John 1:1 supports their view that Jesus is not divine. It does not.
Excellent thread to incite discussion and feedback. I bet there will be some interesting dialoguing taking place. I look forward to watching it. SHALOM
