ANATHORUS THEOS - LXX EXO 7:1 "...(a) god..." IN ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF THE SEPTUAGINT

JOHN 1:1
OLDEST SURVIVING MSS

Papyrus 75
Papyrus Bodmer XV (p75) 175-225 C.E.

THE UNVARNISHED GOSPELS Trnaslated from the original Greek by Andy Gaus (1988); Preface by George Witterschein Pages 14,15. "...If the Word is something other than God, or not quite identical with God, or was in some real sense separated from God, then several important points of doctrine were in apparent danger: the full unmitigated divinity of Jesus Christ as the Second Person of the Trinity; and by extension the doctrine of the Trinity itself..."

Exodus 7:1 Greek OT: Septuagint with Diacritics
καὶ εἶπεν κύριος πρὸς μωυσῆν λέγων ἰδοὺ δέδωκά σε θεὸν φαραω καὶ ααρων ὁ ἀδελφός σου ἔσται σου προφήτης

(NETS) A New English Translation of the Septuagint, 2007
Exodus 7:1: "...And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, "I have given you as a god to Pharao, and Arron, your brother, shall be your prophet..."

Brenton's edition (Sir Lancelot C.L. Brenton), by Hendrickson Publishers. Originally published by Samuel Bagster & Sons, Ltd., London, 1851. Exodus 7:1: "...And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, Behold, I have made thee a god to Pharao, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet..."

Greek Septuagint in English Holy Orthodox Bible by Peter Papoutsis
Exodus 7:1: "...And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, Behold, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet..."

Charles Thomson's English Translation of the Greek Septuagint (LXX) Exodus 7:1: "...Lord spoke to Moses saying, Behold I have made thee a god to Pharao, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet,..."

Just a personal thought on John 1:1.

Should the entire English language be changed in order to accommodate a particular religious viewpoint?

What do I mean?

Should we never use the English indefinite article (A) when translating Greek into English, just because it is not the same as English?

Why should a special exception to the rule be made for John 1:1?

English translators of the New Testament (and as seen above the Septuagint) freely use the indefinite article (A) thousands of times throughout their translations.

Just not when it comes to John 1:1 though.

Whole grammars and new rules have been made up by biased Trinitarians in modern times just to avoid using (A) at John 1:1. (I.e., Cowells rule, Grandville Sharps rule, and dozens and dozens of primers and grammars)

Students at certain universities are automatically given a fail in Greek studies if they translate John 1:1 with an (A).

Why?

As has been given worldwide publicity in the worlds most published magazine the Watchtower, Coptic or native Egyptian is closer to English than any other ancient language that the Bible was translated into and uses an indefinite article (A) in John 1:1.

1911: “... and [a] God was the Word...” - (George William Horner, The Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Southern Dialect [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1911-1924]).

2003: "...In the beginning existed the Word, and the Word existed with God,
and the Word was a God..." - (Lance Jenott's (Princeton U.) Coptic translation of John 1:1)

SOURCE: http://depts.washington.edu/cartah/text_archive/coptic/coptjohn.shtml

2006: "...Certain types of Coptic indefinite nouns do not need to have the indefinite article translated by "a," but the Coptic noun noute, "god" is not one of those nouns. With noute and nouns of its class, the "a" is translated, as shown by Coptic grammarian Thomas O. Lambdin's example in his grammar book, where he translates ntof ounoute pe as "he is a god." - (Thomas O. Lambdin's Introduction to Sahidic Coptic, page 18. As quoted Friday, October 13, 2006 Coptic John 1:1c and Trinitarian Apologists.)

SOURCE: http://nwtandcoptic.blogspot.com/2006/10/coptic-john-1-and-trinitarian.html

2006: "...(ounoute) is technically an indefinite noun, and the full sense of it is conveyed by means of the English indefinite article "the Word was a god". Still a translator may perceive that contextual emphasis is more on quality than entity, and choose to use an adjective "and the Word was divine" to convey the sense..." - (Translation by Manal Gabr, in his thesis Philological studies of the Coptic versions of the Gospel of John. As quoted on forum)

SOURCE: www.copticjohn.blogspot.com

2006: “The Coptic Bohairic version also has the indefinite article, written in full form, ou before the word for “god,” at John 1:1c, ie., “a god.” This is basically the Bible in use by the modern Coptic church, reading in Coptic: ouoh ne ounoute pe Picaji, literally, “and was a god the Word.” However, certain English translations of the Coptic Bible ignore this fact. The modern Coptic church, following Orthodox tradition since the 4th century C.E., rather than its Bible, ignores this reading to teach Trinitarianism.” - (Divine Truth or Human Tradition, Patrick Navas, page 314.)

SOURCE: http://www.nwtandcoptic.blogspot.com

2006: 1 "...In the beginning the Word existed. The Word existed in the presence of God, and the Word was a divine being. 2 This one existed in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into existence through him; without him nothing that exists came to be. What came to be 4 through him was life, the life that is the light of mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness cannot overtake it. 6.There came a man who was sent out by God, his name was John. 7 This one came to bear witness, to bear witness about the light, so that everyone may actively believe through him.. 8 He was not the light, but his purpose was to bear witness about the light. 9 The real light which gives light to everyone was about to come into the world. 10 He was in the world, the world which came into existence through him, but the world did not know him. 11 He came to those who were his own, yet those who were his own did not receive him. 12 But he gave authority to become children of God to those who did receive him, to those actively believing in his name. 13 The origin of these was not flesh and blood, nor human will; they were begotten from God. 14 He was made flesh and lived with us. We saw his dignity, the dignity possessed by a Father’s only son; he was filled with divine loving-kindness and truth. 15 John bore witness about him, calling out and declaring, "This was the one concerning whom I said, ‘He who comes behind me has come to be ahead of me, because he existed prior to me.’" 16 From his fullness we all received life and divine lovingkindness upon divine loving-kindness. 17 The Law was given through Moses, but the divine loving-kindness and the truth came to be through Jesus, the Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God at any time. The divine being, the only Son who is in the bosom of his father, is the one who has revealed him..." - (*The Interlinear Translation and the Contemporary English translation are copyright 2006 by Solomon Landers.)
[FOOTNOTES]:
Verse 1: Literally, “and the Word was a god.” Alternatively, “and the Word was
divine.”
Verse 14: Dignity. Or, “glory.”
Verses 14, 16, 17: Divine loving-kindness. Or, “unmerited favor.”
Verse 18: Or, “The god [who is] the only Son in the bosom of his Father.”
*The Coptic text is based on the texts of George W. Horner and J. Warren Wells. The text of J. Warren Wells is copyright, and used by permission of the author (9/11/06).

SOURCE: http://www.jehovah.to/exe/translation/coptic.pdf

2006: "...The Word was a god..." - (Dr. Ariel Shisha-Halevy,Coptic scholar and grammarain at Hebrew University in Israel, as quoted in personal corespondance in forum)

SOURCE: www.copticjohn.blogspot.com

2006: "...(ounoute) is technically an indefinite noun, and the full sense of it is conveyed by means of the English indefinite article "the Word was a god". Still a translator may perceive that contextual emphasis is more on quality than entity, and choose to use an adjective "and the Word was divine" to convey the sense..." - (Translation by Manal Gabr, in his thesis Philological studies of the Coptic versions of the Gospel of John. As quoted on forum)

SOURCE: www.copticjohn.blogspot.com

2006: "...The Word was godly..." - (Dr. Ariel Shisha-Halevy,Coptic scholar and grammarain at Hebrew University in Israel, as quoted in personal corespondance in forum)

SOURCE: www.copticjohn.blogspot.com

2006: "...The Word was divine..." - (Dr. Ariel Shisha-Halevy, Coptic scholar and grammarain at Hebrew University in Israel, as quoted personal corespondance in forum)

SOURCE: www.copticjohn.blogspot.com

2006: Thursday, November 16. "...As Coptic grammarain Ariel Shisha-Halevy has said, the Coptic text of John 1:1c admits to only two categories of English translation: "the Word was a god" or "the Word was divine," or similar. Under no circumstances does the Coptic text say "the Word was God," and there is no justification for translating it that way in English..." - (As quoted in personal correspondance on forum)

SOURCE: www.copticjohn.blogspot.com

2006: 1. “...In the beginning the Word existed. The Word existed in the presence of God, and the Word was a divine being...” - (A Contemporary English Translation of Coptic John 1:1-18, 2006)

2007: "...a-god is the-Word..." - (Yale University's Coptic grammarian Dr. Bentley Layton, Coptic in 20 Lessons: Introduction to Sahidic Coptic With Exercises & Vocabularies (Peeters Leuven, 2007) Page 7: "...Coptic John 1:1c literally as: auw ne. u.noute pe p.Saje And past tense marker- "a-god is the-Word"..."

SOURCE: www.copticjohn.blogspot.com

2007: "...and the Word was divine." Coptic ou.noute pe could signal adjectively "he is divine..." - (Yale University's Coptic grammarian Dr. Bentley Layton, Coptic in 20 Lessons: Introduction to Sahidic Coptic With Exercises & Vocabularies (Peeters Leuven, 2007) Page 34)

SOURCE: www.copticjohn.blogspot.com

2008: "...In the beginning existed the Word, and the Word existed with the God, and a god was the Word..." - (The Watchtower, November 1st, Interlinear translation from 3rd Century Sahadic Coptic text)

2008: "...the Word was like God..." - (Coptic researcher J. Warren Wells of the Sahidica Project. Mr. Wells has 30 years in Greek studies and 20 years of Coptic study - as quoted on forum)

SOURCE: www.copticjohn.blogspot.com

2008: "...a god was the Word..." Coptic researcher J. Warren Wells of the Sahidica Project Mr. Wells has 30 years in Greek studies and 20 years of Coptic study, and Wells has confirmed positively in personal correspondence that the Coptic version of John 1:1c literally does say, "a god was the Word."..." - (As quoted on the forum)

SOURCE: www.copticjohn.blogspot.com

Why don't we read about this language and versions and it's MSS in any of the critical footnotes of John 1:1 in modern English versions?

For nearly a century they have merely ignored it.

Look into any New Testament critical text, such as the Nestle-Aland 27th edition (NA27), and you will see that the ancient Coptic text readings are given for many other New Testament verses.

But not for John 1:1.

One has to ask why?

BIAS IN BIBLE TRANSLATION is a major factor in doctrine throughout the history of Christianity.

Including Post-Biblical Christian writings. In fact more so among the (ANF) Ante-Nicene Fathers as they are known.

Just a passing thought.