One of the controversial passages when talking to Jehovah’s Witnesses is John 1:1. Most Bibles translate it something like: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1 ESV)
The New World Translation, however, translates it as: “In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.“
Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that their translation is more faithful to the Greek. Here is a transliteration of the Greek of this passage: “En archȩ̄ ēn ho logos, kai ho logos ēn pros ton theon, kai theos ēn ho logos.“
Jehovah’s Witnesses will point out that ‘theos’ (God) lacks the definite article and so it should be translated ‘a god’ instead of ‘God.’ It is true that there is no definite article and that nouns without the definite article are often translated with ‘a’ before it. However, are the Jehovah’s Witnesses being consistent? Notice that the NWT has “In [the] beginning.” The reason of this is that ‘archȩ̄’ (beginning) does not have a definite article and so the NWT provides the missing definite article. But why not be consistent? If the lack of a definite article means ‘a god,’ why not ‘a beginning’ as well? Of course the reason is that in context, John is obviously talking about the beginning and not just a beginning of many different beginnings. The NWT allows context to trump grammar.
So what is the theological context of the rest of the verse? Jewish monotheism. The Bible is clear that there is only one God. To say that the Word (Jesus) was a secondary god in addition to Jehovah God would be to break with Jewish monotheism and embrace polytheism. Since Christians continue to be monotheistic, we allow the theological context to help inform our grammar. Grammar does not demand theos be translated ‘a god’ but biblical theology demands that it be translated ‘God.’
