Aburaees wrote:I've noticed that some translators make Exodus 7:1 say "a god" when referring to Moses, whilst making John 1:1 say "God" when referring to Jesus.
I've also noticed that conversely some people say that Exodus 7:1 should read "God" whilst John 1:1 should read "a god".
Are any of these positions consistent with respect to the grammar of the original, or should they have made up their mind one way or the other and rendered them both to read "God" or both to read "a god"?
To determine the actual meaning of a word the wise thing to do is to look at its numerous usage and how it is used to determined an authentic meaning.
For a fact the Hebrew word "Elohim" which is plural of "eloahh" has three given interpretations
1) When applied to the Creator it means "G-d" expressing the plural of majesty
2) When applied to other than the Creator it stickly means "gods"
3) When applied to the Creator the plural "Elohim" is making reference to the Christian trinity whom reject "#1)" the plural of majesty concept. Thus it maintains the singular meaning like the plural of majesty but expressing the truine G-d in the singular according to christian dogma.
A)It is would be obvious those who translate "Elohim" as "a god" in Exo 7:1 are trinitarians as it would be inconsistane with their beliefs to render "Elohim" as "G-d" applied to Moses which would run into conflict as Moses is on one Person but called ascribed to in the plural.
B)As for those translators who render "Elohim" as "G-d" these are those who believe it to be the plural of majesty. When applied to Moses it implied also the plural of Majest or Respect as Moses came with powers of Majesty like a god to the Egyptians whom was also feared like a god.
As for the Gospel according to John 1:1 there is serious grammar at hand dealing with nomative and accusative readings.
en arche en ho logos kai ho logos en pros ton theon kai theos en ho logos houtos en en arche pros ton theon
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God (ton theon), and the Word was God (theos), the same was in the beginning with God (ton theon). [Gospel According to John 1:1]
Now before we go into the greek lets just look as this context and the inference it is alluding to.
The Logos is said here to have been with Ton Theon (G-d or literally "the god") automatically this phrase expresses two intenties as one being with the other in the begining as the context expresses. The next phrase "..and the word was God (theos).." followed by "..the same (?) was in the beginning with God (ton theon).
Hello H2O my dear friend seems you made a little mistake to reveal your scholarship in biblical greek, see the word for '
with' in greek is '
pros' and when used in the phrase "pros ton theos" it means "with regards to" or " with reference to" the accusative form of the subject case, " ie "pros ton theos" is being the direct object of the verb for "ho logos", the first phrase of "ho logos" is quite explicit that the Word is singular, masculine and nominative, the imperfect tense that starts of that sentence makes it quite clear that this is on going in other words eternal relationship.
Grammatically this is expressing two gods were in the begining whereas the word was of a lesser god whom was with the supreme G-d.
Ie Jesus is God
As for Christian interpretation it is taken as speaking about one and the same G-d.
Ie Jesus is God
As for the geek word "Theos" being used in the context without the article "the" ie "ton" or "ho" its justification of its absents is that there was no reason for it grammatically but if this is true then why bring it back into the last phrase "..the same (?) was in the beginning with God (ton theon)"
Your greek scholarship is beginning to show; again because this is accusative (the object of the verb) the first mention of theos is the object and the second mention of theos is the subject of the verb, there is no definite article because the noun is known from the context, the writer is very clear on what he wants to convey, there is no ton or ho theo in the final phrase of theo because it simply is not in the greek text either (have a read from your copy and paste yourself it's not in there what exactly are you arguing about?) wait a minute are you paraphrasing Ahmed Deedat's article??
One thing I would agree is that "theos" does not always mean "a god". It can means also "G-d" depending on the context it is being used in. In the context about grammatically speaking it is denoting another god.
Good grief there is no indefinite article in greek, neither can "a God" be rendered from it's context. (The jehovah witnesses are the ones who chose to translate it as a god making complete mockery of the context since they do not believe Jesus is God but the angel Michael)
Loki wrote:The translators translated it from "God" to "a god" because they couldn't see the reasoning as why Moses would be called God. The problem here is not that Moses is "God" but the the LORD who is is clearly demonstrated as the TRUE GOD(Caps), made Moses "AS" God to the Pharaoh. God making Moses as God and being God are not the same, Moses had been made as ruler and judge over the Pharaoh, not literally God Himself as you can clearly see the distinction within the verse.
"AS" <~~~~~Does not exist in the hebrew which would have been properly supported by the Hebrew word "kemow". Can you please explain to me how "as" was introduced here and for what reason. I already know what it is, I want to see what you are going to say hoping you will start to realize the reality of defectiveness in translations to be suited to be the word of G-d from its original.
Help us out here buddy let's cut to the chase the bible is corrupt I think your entire religion is wrong because I don't think this word should be translated like this ( forget that my religion has no context and infinitely has this problem of translation) here is islam with jihad upon the people of the book until they pay the jizya in willing submission from the pedofile, rapist, adulterer, fornicator et al you can join this cultural imperial state imposing it's ridiculous legalism on you, see I use to be a christian then a jew then I became a muslim you can do it too, why don't you do it? You will get 70 houris (where the root word whores come from) why don't you do it?? don't you know that the raping megalomaniac lunatic was the best example of mankind for all eternity and a mercy???