It was, after all, a brief article written just 3 years after the release of the NWT Christian Greek Scriptures. If a period is placed before o` w'n ktl., the doxology refers to God as defined in Israel (so EAbbot, JBL 1, 1881, 81-154; 3, 1883, 90-112; RLipsius; HHoltzmann, Ntl. A special consideration in favor of this interpretation is the status assigned to Christ in 1 Cor -28 and the probability that Paul is not likely to have violated the injunction in Dt 5:7. Urchristentum 1917, 363; WWrede, Pls 1905, 82; CStrmman, ZNW 8, 1907, 319f)." It appears from this part of the entry that the author(s) assume that designating Christ as "QEOS over all" would violate the First Commandment (Deut. This is a bizarre claim in a work supposedly produced to service the Christian community. 1, 229f; JGriffiths, ET 62, '50/51, 314-16; BMetzger, ET 63, '51/52, 125f), 18b." The scholarship is somewhat more recent here, extending up to the early 1950s (a half century after the latest edition! That's still far too behind the times to support your characterization. He tells us that Paul does not "control" what John meant and vice versa.
At the time, he may well have been convinced by the so-called Colwell's Rule (see here for more details) and thought it was grammatically impossible, but over the intervening years, revised his opinion."The upgraded 3rd Edition of the Baur, Danker, Arndt, and Gingrich Greek-English Lexicon (BDAG) supports our view of Jesus as 'a god' 100%. to Christ (without necessarily equating Christ with the Father, and therefore in harmony w. Mk and 4a below), though the interpretation of some of the pass. It assumes without argument or explanation that equating Christ with the Father would be out of harmony with the Shema. Does the author mean *identifying* Christ *as* the Father _per se_? Theol.(2 ) II 1911, 99f; EGnther, St Kr 73, 1900, 636-44; FBurkitt, JTS 5, 1904, 451-55; Jlicher; PFeine, Theol. If a comma is used in the same place, the reference is to Christ (so BWeiss; EBrse, NKZ 10, 1899, 645-57 et al.; NRSV text; RSV mg. It proves theological bias has influenced the reference work here (as it does elsewhere). I have commented at length elsewhere on the tendentious and misleading nature of these comments. However, those who hold to the harmony of Scripture - as do Jehovah's Witnesses - do not accept this necessary presupposition.
No Greek grammar or lexicon states it is permissible to translate a dative noun as an adverb. Be Duhn's statement that he is unaware of who Murray J. Be Duhn argues that the traditional translation is extremely "unlikely" from a grammatical standpoint. De Buhn has not interacted publicly with the majority of scholarship on this topic (a summary of which you may find here) which his views contradict.
Also, the traditional rendering follows the Greek precisely. 8, 41, who quotes Hermippus: Pythagoras returns from a journey to Hades and appears among his followers [eivse,rcesqai eivj th.n evkklhsi,an], and they consider him qei/o,n tina) J (on the combination of ku,rioj and qeo,j s. This includes his recent book, Truth in Translation..
Jn 1:1 is translated : Originally the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god, a translation which is grammatically impossible. Becker bases this view, apparently, on Philo's distinction between ho theos and theos, as do other German scholars of his generation (e.g., Haenchen).
[Col 2:1-17 is translated : He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation, because by means of him all other things were created... VIhsou/ Ac Pl Ha 3, 10; Cristo.j VIhsou/j o` qeo,j 6, 24; cp. Few modern Biblical scholars would agree with Becker on this point.
The Watchtower and Jehovah's Witness apologists have often cited scholars in support of the New World Translation in general, and particularly its rendering of John 1:1c ("and the Word was a god").
But it is not clear that Barclay lied in the first place. He is not recognized in the scholarly community as an expert in Biblical Greek.
It is not my intent to be exhaustive; however I've tried to cover the scholars most often cited; I think you'll find that any omissions will be obscure scholars that are not generally recognized as authoritative in the scholarly community. AWlosk, Rmischer Kaiserkult '78." BDAG agrees that Ignatius frequently called Christ QEOS.
If you know of a prominent scholar that I've missed, please let me know so that I may include him/her in a future revision of this article. Odd, isn't it, that once the field of texts goes outside the Bible the author (s) feel no need to offer an explanation for the designation of Christ as QEOS?
I am quite sure myself that the following is the correct translation. Be Duhn received his Master of Arts in Theological Studies from Harvard Divinity School.
Even if the claim is true, and Barclay knowingly lied, it is logically fallacious to claim this fact exonerates the WT from twisting its quote from him. This degree requires an intermediate level of competence in Greek.