Jehovah`s Witness/Rando and John 1:1


Rando gave an answer about John 1:1 and there is some details that dont sound right  He said that  when an article is withheld it is invoking the Second Instance of (theos) in the feminine sense "a god"  he repeats that idea a couple of times and puts it in bold print  How is "a god" in the feminine sense? And is it true that just because  the article is missing  before theos that it means "a god"?

Thanks for your time

Greetings Gordon and thank you for that question.

The issue of John 1:1 comes up a lot. Not that I want to put Rando down on this, but his answer is incorrect. There is no way that “without the article the meaning is changed to the Feminine Noun 'a god'.”    However I think that  I can understand his confusion over this, and I do have an explanation as to why he said that.

The word theos is always in the masculine gender no matter how it is used. And no, just because the definite article is missing before theos,  does not automatically put the “a” before it. (a god) There are certain grammatical principles that must be present before the indefinite article “a” is used with a noun, in this case theos. (John 1:1 meets those conditions)

A little background on the word God in Greek. Greek has 5 different grammatical language cases that words fit into. I want describe what they are or what the do. English as just 3 different  grammatical language cases. Bellow are the Greek masculine nouns for God in their various case as found in the Bible.

thee = vocative case
theo  =  dative case
theos = nominative case
theou = genitive case
theon = accusative case

theoi = nominative case
theois = dative case
theous =  accusative case

Bellow are the Feminine words (goddess) as found in the Bible
theas = genitive case
thean = accusative case

Bellow are some other Feminine words that are rendered as divine, divinity, divine nature as found in the Bible.
theotes = genitive  case
theiotes = nominative  case

The above words are all nouns. There is one adjective that I found in the neuter gender. As an adjective is a word describes something about a noun. For example “its a cloudy day” The word cloudy is the adjective
theios = accusative case – meaning godlike

So, why did Rando think that “without the article the meaning is changed to the Feminine Noun 'a god'. ” 

Something he said gives me the clue. He said … “ theos denotes the Deity of Christ in that the Word is Divine and Godlike being the same nature and essence of God. “ Why would he say that?   I would say he has come to that conclusion because he is under the impression that because some English Bible do not use the word god in the last part of John 1:1 at all, such as

1829: "and was himself a divine person" Harwood ,
1928: "and the Word was a divine being." La Bible du Centenaire, L'Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel.
1935: "and the Word was divine." The Bible-An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed.
1961, "what God was, the Word was" Moffatt,
1972, "the Logos was divine” Translator's NT,
1973, "The Word was with God and shared his nature” Barclay,
1976, "the nature of the Word was the same as the nature of God" Schonfield,
1985, "the Word was divine” Revised English,
1989, "what God was, the Word was” Scholar's Version,
1993, "The Divine word and wisdom was there with God, and it was what God was” Madsen,
1994, "the Word was a divine Being" Becker,

Possibly Rando had seen this from the footnote in the Translator's NT, 1973,  "There is a distinction in the Greek here between 'with God' and 'God.' In the first instance, the article is used and this makes the reference specific. In the second instance there is not article, and it is difficult to believe that the omission is not significant. In effect it gives an adjectival quality to the second use of Theos (God) so that the phrae means 'The Word was divine'."

Notice that foot note recognises that the last word theos (god) seems more to act like an adjective describing a quality about the subject of the sentence which is “the Word”

If you look back you will see that the Greek words for “divine” are in the Feminine gender. So I am assuming that is why Rando made the statement that he did.

One of the principles of translation is to translate as literally as possible. Another principle is that when a literal translation can not be done to translate the thoughts or ideas of the author.

A literal translation using the parameters  of Greek grammar and English grammar is to translate as the NWT has done. To translate the thought one could use divine or godlike. However this passage is not difficult to translates and for one, I would advocate a literal rendering into English.

Jehovah`s Witness

All Answers

Answers by Expert:

Ask Experts


Brenton Hepburn


I AM one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and I am always learning. I am NOT an expert in the full sense of the word but I can answer questions on the reliability of the NWT - the so called mind control problems-so called prophecies - how being a JW affects the individual and relatives and general practices and history of Jehovah’s Witnesses. >>WARNING<< Please be aware that there are people here who ARE NOT practicing JWs. By all means ask these ones questions. Depending on the question you will get an honest answer, but, generally the answer you get, will mislead you as to what we believe, often because, they do not give ALL the relevant details. These ones will, have an agenda against JWs., and will at times give answers that are not correct in regard to JW teachings and practices. If you are after a answer from one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, please read some of the answers that the various experts have published before choosing someone. If you want to ask one of the NON JWs a question, that is fine, BUT if you want a balancing view after asking one of the NON JWs, ask a JW the same question. PLEASE ALSO NOTE: There(have been)and are, some "experts" here who are NOT always the most courteous and polite, at times are actually quite rude, that applies to both JW's and non JW's and their answers may offend, especially when they get personal and attack the character of the person and not the message. Unfortunately some here that have done that. So it IS IMPORTANT to chose an "expert" that YOU feel will best suit YOU by reading some of their past answers . . . . .


I have been a publisher since 1964. When I first went on the internet I found a lot of negative information dealing with Jehovah’s Witnesses covering prophecy, mind control and what many said was a very bad translation of the Bible known as the NWT. It shook my faith. After may hours researching these topics I could see why some felt that way, but, I was also able to explain why there were these misleading views. I can now set matters straight for anyone that has negative information about Jehovah’s Witness to show them that such information is at best misleading and at worst dangerous lies.

I have been a student of the Bible for many years, am trying to teach myself Biblical Greek. Was a public tax accountant for many years untill SEP 2009 when I gave it up due to health problems.

©2017 All rights reserved.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]