The deity of Christ against the New World Translation

What you'll learn

Explain in simple terms why John 1:1c should not be translated “the Word was a god”, using Colwell's rule and the qualitative predicate nominative correctly.
Identify key New World Translation renderings (Colossians 1:16-17, John 8:58, Hebrews 1:6, 1:8) and show what the Greek and context actually say.
Answer the claim that Jesus is Michael the archangel from Hebrews 1 and Jude 9.

Why the translation matters

The New World Translation (NWT) was produced by an anonymous committee and is the only Bible most Witnesses read. On most verses it is a fairly literal translation. But on passages that teach the deity of Christ, it repeatedly chooses renderings that match Watchtower theology. You do not need to be a Greek scholar to see this, but you do need to understand a few simple ideas well enough to explain them at a doorstep.

A word of caution. Do not claim more than you know. If you overstate a Greek point, a well-trained Witness will notice, and you will lose credibility. Learn a few points accurately and keep pointing back to the context, which anyone can read.

You studied the deity of Christ in Know Your Faith, Lesson 4, and the main texts (John 1, Hebrews 1) in Doctrines Under Fire, Lesson 2. This lesson applies them to the renderings a Witness will actually show you.

Why does the lesson warn you not to overstate a Greek point when discussing the New World Translation?Show answer

A well-trained Witness will notice if you claim more than you know, and you will lose credibility. You do not need to be a Greek scholar, but you do need to understand a few ideas accurately. The safest approach is to learn a few points well and keep pointing back to the context, which anyone can read.

Witness will notice overstatement
lose credibility
learn a few points accurately
keep returning to context

John 1:1 and the “a god” rendering

John 1:1 reads in Greek: en archē ēn ho logos, kai ho logos ēn pros ton theon, kai theos ēn ho logos. The NWT renders the last clause “and the Word was a god”. Its argument: in the second clause “God” (ton theon) has the article “the”; in the third clause theos has no article, so it should be indefinite, “a god”.

Three points answer this. First, Greek has no indefinite article (“a”). A noun without the article can be definite, indefinite or qualitative depending on context. Second, the NWT itself does not follow its own rule: theos without the article appears in John 1:6, 12, 13 and 18, and the NWT renders each as “God”. Third, word order matters. In the third clause theos comes before the verb “was”, and it is the predicate (the thing said about the Word).

Colwell's rule (from E. C. Colwell, 1933) observed that a definite predicate noun placed before the verb usually lacks the article. So the missing article does not make theos indefinite. But Colwell does not prove that theos is definite either. That is where Philip Harner's 1973 study and later scholars such as Daniel Wallace come in: a qualitative anarthrous predicate nominative (a noun without the article, in the predicate, before the verb) usually stresses the nature or quality of the subject. “Anarthrous” simply means “without the article”.

In plain English: John is saying the Word had the very nature of God. He was not the Father (the Word was with God), but he was everything God is. A good paraphrase is “what God was, the Word was” (NEB), or simply “the Word was God”. If John had wanted to say “a god” in the sense of a lesser divine being, he could have used a word like theios (divine) or built a clearer sentence, and he would have contradicted Isaiah 43:10 and the strict monotheism of every Jew of his day.

Notice how the Witness view actually creates two gods: Jehovah, the true God, and Jesus, “a god”, a mighty one. Ask: is Jesus a true god or a false god? The Bible knows only one true God and many false ones (1 Cor 8:4-6; Isa 44:6-8).

A Witness says, "The second theos in John 1:1 has no article, so it must mean 'a god'." Give two answers from the lesson.Show answer

First, Greek has no indefinite article, so a noun without the article can be definite, indefinite or qualitative depending on context. Second, the NWT breaks its own rule, rendering theos without the article as "God" in John 1:6, 12, 13 and 18. Third, theos comes before the verb as the predicate, and such nouns usually stress the nature or quality of the subject.

no indefinite article in Greek
NWT inconsistent (1:6, 12, 13, 18)
word order: predicate before verb
stresses nature or quality

Put the meaning of "the Word was God" into one sentence you could say to a friend, and explain why the "a god" reading creates a problem.Show answer

John is saying that what God was, the Word was: he had the very nature of God while still being distinct from the Father, because he was with God. The "a god" reading creates two gods, Jehovah the true God and Jesus a lesser mighty one. But the Bible knows only one true God and many false ones (1 Cor 8:4-6; Isa 44:6-8), so we can ask whether Jesus is a true god or a false god.

"what God was, the Word was"
distinct from the Father, same nature
"a god" makes two gods
one true God, others false

Colossians 1:16-17: the word “other”

Paul says that in Christ “all things were created... all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things”. The NWT reads “all other things” four times in these verses, though no word for “other” (allōn) appears in the Greek. In the 1984 edition the word was placed in square brackets, signalling an addition; the 2013 revision drops the brackets, so “other” now reads as if it were part of the text (it is also added in 1:20). Check which edition the Witness in front of you is using. The Watchtower's own Kingdom Interlinear, which prints a word-for-word English line under the Greek, has no “other” here (more on using it in Lesson 4).

Why add it? Because if Jesus is a creature, he cannot have created all things; he must have created everything else. But Paul's point is the reverse: Christ stands on the Creator side of the line. The same logic appears in John 1:3: “all things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.” If Jesus were made, he would have to have made himself.

Explain why the NWT adds the word "other" in Colossians 1:16-17, and how John 1:3 answers it.Show answer

There is no Greek word for "other" in these verses, but if Jesus is a creature he could not have created all things, only everything else, so the NWT adds it (in brackets in 1984, without brackets in 2013). Paul's point is the reverse: Christ stands on the Creator side of the line. John 1:3 says nothing that was made was made without him, so if Jesus were made he would have had to make himself.

"other" not in the Greek
added to fit creature theology
brackets dropped in 2013
John 1:3: he would have made himself

John 8:58 and the Hebrews 1 sequence

In John 8:58 Jesus says, “before Abraham was, I am” (egō eimi). The NWT (1984 and 2013) renders it “before Abraham came into existence, I have been.” The Greek verb is present tense. The contrast is between Abraham who came to be (genesthai) and Jesus who simply is. The Jews' reaction in 8:59, picking up stones, shows they heard a claim to divine identity, echoing Exodus 3:14 and the “I am he” sayings of Isaiah (43:10; 46:4). The NWT reading makes Jesus merely older than Abraham, which would hardly provoke stoning.

Hebrews 1 is a whole chapter on the Son's superiority to angels. In 1:6, “let all God's angels worship him”, the NWT renders the Greek verb (proskyneō) as “do obeisance” when it refers to Jesus (since 1971; earlier editions read “worship him” here), though it usually renders it “worship” when it refers to Jehovah. Yet Jesus himself said worship belongs to God alone (Matt 4:10).

In 1:8 the Father says to the Son, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever” (quoting Ps 45:6). The NWT reads “God is your throne forever and ever”. Grammatically both are possible, but the context (1:7-8: “of the angels he says... but of the Son he says”) is addressing the Son directly. In 1:10-12 the writer applies Psalm 102:25-27 to the Son: “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth.” In the Psalm that is spoken to Yahweh, the Creator. The writer to the Hebrews could not make it plainer.

What is the difference between "I have been" and "I am" in John 8:58, and how does the crowd's reaction help decide which is right?Show answer

The Greek verb is present tense, contrasting Abraham who came to be with Jesus who simply is. The NWT's "I have been" makes Jesus merely older than Abraham. But the Jews picked up stones (8:59), showing they heard a claim to divine identity echoing Exodus 3:14 and Isaiah's "I am he"; being older would hardly provoke stoning.

present tense "I am"
Abraham came to be; Jesus is
stoning shows claim to deity
echoes Exod 3:14, Isaiah

Which verses in Hebrews 1 show the Son is more than an angel, and how?Show answer

In 1:6 all God's angels are told to worship him, and Jesus said worship belongs to God alone (Matt 4:10), though the NWT renders it "do obeisance" for Jesus. In 1:8 the Father addresses the Son, "Your throne, O God," as the context of 1:7-8 shows. In 1:10-12 the writer applies Psalm 102, spoken to Yahweh the Creator, to the Son.

1:6 angels worship him
NWT inconsistency on proskyneo
1:8 Son addressed as God
1:10-12 Yahweh Creator text applied

Is Jesus Michael the archangel?

Witnesses teach that Jesus' prehuman name was Michael, citing 1 Thessalonians 4:16 (the Lord descends “with the voice of an archangel”) and Revelation 12:7 (Michael fights the dragon). But 1 Thessalonians 4:16 also says “with the sound of the trumpet of God”; if “voice of an archangel” makes Jesus an archangel, “trumpet of God” would make him a trumpet. The phrase describes what accompanies his coming.

Hebrews 1:5 asks, “to which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son’?” The answer expected is: none. 1:13 repeats the pattern. And Jude 9 says Michael “did not presume to pronounce a blasphemous judgement” against the devil but said, “The Lord rebuke you.” Jesus, by contrast, rebukes Satan on his own authority (Matt 4:10; Mark 8:33). Michael is “one of the chief princes” (Dan 10:13), one among several; the Son is unique (John 1:14, 18).

How would you answer someone who says 1 Thessalonians 4:16 proves Jesus is Michael the archangel?Show answer

The verse also says the Lord comes "with the trumpet of God"; if the archangel's voice made Jesus an archangel, the trumpet would make him a trumpet. The phrase describes what accompanies his coming. Hebrews 1:5 and 1:13 show God never called an angel his Son, and while Michael said "The Lord rebuke you" (Jude 9), Jesus rebuked Satan on his own authority.

"trumpet of God" parallel
describes what accompanies his coming
Heb 1:5: no angel called Son
Jude 9 vs Jesus' own authority

In their own words

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” (John 1:1, New World Translation)

“Jesus is God's firstborn, the first of his creations, through whom Jehovah created all other things.” (Col 1:15-16 NWT; Rev 3:14; What Does the Bible Really Teach? (2005))

“Before he came to earth, Jesus was known in heaven as Michael the archangel.” (1 Thess 4:16; Jude 9; Rev 12:7; Enjoy Life Forever! (2021))

“Jesus said “Before Abraham came into existence, I have been,” showing he existed before Abraham, not that he is Jehovah.” (John 8:58, New World Translation)

Key texts

John 1:1-3: The Word eternally existed, was with God, and was God; all things came into being through him. Verse 3 rules out the Word being a created thing.
John 1:18: “No one has ever seen God” uses theos without the article, and the NWT renders it “God”; in the best-attested reading (P66, P75) the verse then calls the Son monogenēs theos, “the only God, who is at the Father's side” (NWT: “the only-begotten god”); some manuscripts read “only Son”.
Colossians 1:16-17: Christ created all things and is before all things; compare the Greek with the NWT's added “other”.
John 8:58-59: Jesus' “I am” claim in the present tense and the crowd's attempt to stone him for blasphemy.
Hebrews 1:6, 8, 10-12: Angels worship the Son; the Father calls the Son “God”; Yahweh's creation work in Psalm 102 is applied to the Son.
Isaiah 44:24: Yahweh made all things “alone” and “by myself”; yet the New Testament says all things were made through the Son. Only if the Son shares the identity of Yahweh do these agree.
Jude 9: Michael defers to the Lord's rebuke; Jesus rebukes Satan in his own authority. They are not the same person.

Objections and answers

Try answering each one yourself before you open the response.

“In John 1:1 the first “God” has the article and the second does not. That proves the Word is a different, lesser god.”Show a response

The article does distinguish the persons in 1:1b: the Word was with the God, the Father. But the absence of the article in 1:1c does not make theos indefinite. Greek has no indefinite article, and a predicate noun placed before the verb normally drops the article. The New World Translation itself renders theos without the article as “God” in John 1:6, 12, 13 and 18. Grammarians such as Harner and Wallace show that this construction usually stresses quality: the Word had the full nature of God. And “a god” creates a second true god, which Isaiah 43:10 forbids: “before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.” If Jesus is a god, is he a true god or a false god?

“Colossians 1:15 calls Jesus “the firstborn of all creation.” That means he was the first thing Jehovah created.”Show a response

“Firstborn” (prōtotokos) in Scripture often means pre-eminent heir, not first in time. Psalm 89:27 says God will make David his “firstborn”, though David was the youngest son of Jesse. Ephraim is called God's firstborn (Jer 31:9) though Manasseh was born first. If Paul had meant “first created” he had a word for it, prōtoktistos, which he did not use. The very next verse explains why Christ is firstborn: “for by him all things were created”. He is pre-eminent over creation because he is its Creator. That is why the NWT has to insert the word “other” into verses 16-17 to keep its reading. Can we read the Greek of verse 16 together in your Kingdom Interlinear and see whether “other” is there?

“Hebrews 1:6 says “do obeisance”, not worship. Bowing to a king is honour, not divine worship.”Show a response

Proskyneō can mean bowing in respect, so context decides. Here the context is decisive. The writer is quoting a text (Deut 32:43 in the Septuagint, the ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament; compare Ps 97:7) where the angels' worship is directed to God. Hebrews 1 then calls the Son “God” (1:8) and Creator (1:10). When angels are commanded to worship, it is always worship of God; in Revelation 19:10 and 22:9 an angel refuses John's proskynēsis and says “Worship God.” Yet in Revelation 5:13-14 every creature gives the same blessing and honour “to him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb”. Earlier editions of the NWT itself (1950-1970) read “let all God's angels worship him” here, and older Watchtower literature encouraged worship of Christ before that changed. Do you think the angels are giving Jesus the same honour they give the Father?

“Jesus has the voice of an archangel in 1 Thessalonians 4:16. Only an archangel has an archangel's voice.”Show a response

Read the whole verse: “the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God.” If the voice of an archangel makes Jesus an archangel, then the trumpet of God makes him God, which you would not accept. The phrases describe the events that accompany his return, not his identity. Meanwhile Hebrews 1 sets the Son explicitly above every angel: “to which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son’?” (1:5). And Jude 9 shows Michael would not rebuke Satan himself but said “The Lord rebuke you”, while Jesus says “Be gone, Satan!” (Matt 4:10). They are not the same person.

“The New World Translation was made by people who love Jehovah and stick to the text. Your translations are biased by Trinitarian theology. Of course they read John 1:1 your way.”Show a response

That's a fair concern: every translator brings convictions, and I don't want you to trust a translation just because I like it. So let's test them by consistency and context, which anyone can check. In John 1, the NWT renders theos without the article as "God" in verses 6, 12, 13 and 18, but as "a god" in verse 1. In Colossians 1:16-17 it adds "other" where the Greek has no such word. Mainstream translations made by many scholars from different churches, and checked openly, read "the Word was God" and "all things". If we compare the Greek, perhaps using the Watchtower's own Kingdom Interlinear, and read the surrounding verses, we can see which rendering fits what John and Paul actually wrote. Would you be willing to look at John 1:1-18 together, slowly, and see whether the "a god" rule holds?

“When Thomas said "My Lord and my God!" in John 20:28, he was just exclaiming in shock, like people say "Oh my God!" He wasn't calling Jesus God.”Show a response

I can see why that reading appeals, but look closely at the verse. John says Thomas "answered him", or "said to him": the words are addressed to Jesus. Thomas was a devout Jew who knew the commandment not to take God's name in vain (Exod 20:7). If he were using God's name as an exclamation, Jesus would surely have corrected him. Instead, Jesus commends his faith: "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (John 20:29). Then John immediately gives the purpose of his whole book, that we may believe Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and have life in his name (20:31). The Gospel that opens with "the Word was God" closes with a disciple confessing Jesus as "my God". Doesn't that look deliberate?

Written task

Write a 300-400 word explanation, suitable to read aloud to a Witness elder, of why John 1:1c should not be translated “the Word was a god”. Explain the grammar simply, show the NWT's inconsistency within John 1, address the monotheism issue, and link John 1:1 to John 1:3.

Hand this in to Mr Scott. He will look for:

Explains anarthrous predicate nominatives and Colwell's rule accurately, without overclaiming that Colwell proves definiteness.
Identifies the qualitative sense (nature of God) and explains it in plain language.
Points to NWT inconsistency in John 1:6, 12, 13 or 18.
Uses Isaiah 43:10 or 44:6-8 to press the “true god or false god” problem.
Uses John 1:3 to show the Word is uncreated, in a respectful tone.