Christ Testifies That He Is Not God by Charles Morgridge - 1837

Buy on Amazon for only 99 cents by clicking here - see a local listing for this here

Christ Testifies That He Is Not God by Charles Morgridge - 1837

Christ, speaking of his sheep, said, “My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and none is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I showed you from my Father; for which of these works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him saying, For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy, and because thou, being a man, makest thyself God.”—John x. 29–33. As this is the only instance recorded in the Bible in which Jesus was accused of making himself God, his answer must be important and decisive. “Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, ye are Gods? If he called them Gods unto whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken; say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?”—Verse 34–36.

In this refutation Jesus denies being God; denies calling himself God; and repels the accusation of blasphemy even on the supposition that he had called himself God. He denies being God, by asserting that he was sanctified and sent into the world by his Father. God could not be sanctified, nor sent; neither has he any Father. He denies calling himself God, by asserting that he had only called himself the Son of God. A father and son are two distinct beings; nor is there any term that more strongly marks derived existence, than the term son. Besides, Jesus founds the propriety of calling himself the Son of God, not on any thing peculiar in his nature, or any supposed resemblance or likeness to his Father, but simply on the ground of his being sanctified and sent by the Father. He repels the charge of blasphemy, by appealing to the well known scripture usage, by which they are called Gods unto whom the word of God came. So that if he had called himself God (which he had not done) it would have implied, according to his own explanation, nothing more than that he was a divine messenger—one to whom the word of God came. That this is the sense in which the Jews understood the answer of Jesus is evident from the fact that they never after accused him of making himself God, though urged to do so by considerations as powerful as can well be conceived. When he was arraigned before their Council, and the accusation was blasphemy, they made great efforts to support the charge. They could not obtain the necessary evidence. After they had suborned witnesses, all they could prove by them was, that he had said he could raise up the Temple in three days. Now if Jesus had ever made himself God, or intimated any desire to be considered as God, it is incredible that they should not have urged it against him at a time like this. This would have been the very evidence they felt themselves so much in need of. When they were ready to seize on every circumstance, however trifling; and were driven to extremities, to obtain witnesses to support the charge of blasphemy, it is incredible, I say, that they should not have availed themselves of such an advantage. It is as certain, then, that Jesus never made himself God, as it is that the Jews did not urge it against him at his trial.

Let us suppose the same Jews who accused Jesus of making himself God, had heard other Jews, who were not present when he confuted their charge, complaining that they had heard him call himself God: would they not have been likely to answer them somewhat in the following manner “We ourselves once thought we heard him call himself God; and we accused him of it, and threatened to stone him. But instead of acknowledging it, he denied it; and convinced us that we had accused him wrongfully— that he did not call himself God, but simply the Son of God, whom the Father had sanctified and sent.” Again, had these same Jews, whom he had thus convinced, afterwards heard him actually call himself God, would they not, must they not, have understood him to mean nothing more than, that he was one to whom the word of God came? Yet astonishing as it may seem, his answer and explanation, which perfectly satisfied his enemies, does not appear to have satisfied his friends; nor to have restrained them from repeating the same charge which he refuted, viz. that he, being a man, made himself God.

Let us suppose a royal Missionary to be sent to a foreign land, to publish a most important doctrine. The Missionary is perfectly acquainted with all the difficulties and dangers of the mission. He foresees all the opposition he must meet, and all the hardships he must encounter, before he undertakes. A satisfactory reward being offered, he cheerfully engages in the work. Having arrived at the field of his labor, he opens his commission, exhibits his credentials, and enters upon his work. He preaches the true doctrine of his mission. His hearers perfectly understand his meaning, but they dislike the doctrine, and vehemently remonstrate against it. They accuse him of holding and preaching a doctrine in the highest degree absurd and blasphemous. Finally they severely threaten him, in case he does not retract what he has said, and abandon his position. He now comes forward in self-defence, and assures them that they have mistaken his meaning—that he did not intend to be so understood. He explains himself in a sense wholly different from that which they had conceived, and the offensive doctrine entirely disappears. They admit the explanation, and never after accuse him of preaching the offensive doctrine.

Now what should we think of such a missionary? Should we not think that he had violated the high trust reposed in him, in the most unjustifiable manner? Should we not think, and justly too, that he had made complete shipwreck of his mission? Yet such a Missionary, according to the doctrine of Trinitarians, was the Lord Jesus Christ. He came from heaven to earth to publish a revelation from God. The most important part of this revelation, says the Trinitarian, is the doctrine of the Trinity. Jesus came, then, to preach the doctrine of the Trinity. He proclaimed the object of his mission, and entered upon his work. He preached the doctrine of the Trinity. He made himself God. His hearers clearly comprehended his meaning, but they disliked the doctrine. They accused him of blasphemy; and finally they threatened to stone him. The situation in which Jesus now appears is full of the most thrilling interest. He has published the fundamental doctrine of his mission; and it is rejected. For preaching the truth his life is threatened. Now what ought he to do? What can he do? That he should dissemble is incredible. That he should be intimidated, if he is God, is impossible. If he answers for himself at all, he must, unquestionably, confirm the doctrine of his mission. If he preached what his hearers accused him of preaching, he must now confirm them in the belief they had expressed. He must leave them fully impressed with the following sentiments. “You understand me to say that I am God. In this you are correct. This is the true doctrine of my mission. I shall, therefore, continue to publish it, whatever be the consequences. You may call me a blasphemer; or you may stone me. All this, and more than this, I expected before I came into the world. I knew, from the beginning, what was in man; and what opposition I should excite by telling you the truth. You may never have another opportunity, so favorable, of hearing this great and important doctrine from my lips.” But how essentially different was the course Jesus pursued. He confuted them absolutely. He answered them in such a manner that the doctrine of the Trinity entirely disappeared. He left his captious hearers so fully convinced that he had not made himself God, that they never again accused him of it; notwithstanding they were urged to do so by the most powerful motives, connected with the circumstances of his trial already mentioned.

In reviewing this subject it appears that the Jews had no just cause to accuse Jesus of making himself God. He had said, I and my Father are one. He did not say one nature, one essence, one being, or one God. A Father and Son are two distinct beings. Christ is assuring his disciples of their safety. He calls them his sheep; and says, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. As additional security he adds, My Father who gave them me is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. He here declares the Father to be greater than all, consequently, greater than, himself. If the sheep had not belonged to the Father before they belonged to Christ, the Father could not have given them to him. If the Father were not greater than the Son, his care of the sheep would have added nothing to their safety. I and my Father are one, means one in the business of watching over and protecting the sheep. Paul and Apollos are one. The husband and wife are one. All Christians are one. Jesus prayed that all his disciples might be one in the same sense that he and his Father are one. “That they may be one, even as we are one.” John xvii. 22.

The same unfairness, on the part of the Jews, appears in the fifth chapter, where they accused Jesus of making himself equal with God, only for saying that God was his Father. A charge which Jesus immediately refuted by saying, Verily, verily, I say unto you, the Son can do nothing of himself. If Jesus were God's equal he could do every thing himself.

If any are disposed to insist, as did the unbelieving Jews, that Jesus made himself God, or equal with God, they ought, in order to be consistent with themselves, to insist, also, that he was a blasphemer, and that he had broken the Sabbath: For they were the same witnesses that testified to the whole.

It is worthy of remark that Jesus was not accused of making himself equal with the Father, the supposed first person in the Trinity. There is no more allusion to persons in God, than there is of oceans or continents in him. Jesus is called “the express image of his person,” not persons. There is but one other passage in the Bible where the word equal is found in such connexion with God, or Christ, or Spirit, or Ghost, as to be thought to relate to persons in God. “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.”—Phil. ii. 6. But here is no allusion to persons in God—an idea which does not appear to have been conceived by any writer in the Bible. On the other hand the Scriptures plainly teach that the one God has no equal. “To whom then will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? saith the HOLY ONE.”—Isa. xl. 25. Dr. Doddridge, on Phil. ii. 6, says, “To be and appear as God.” So ISA QEW is most exactly rendered, agreeable to the force of ISA in many places in the Septuagint, which Dr. Whitby has collected in his note on this place. The proper Greek phrase equal to God, is ISON TO QEW, which is used, John v. 18. There is but one instance, then, in the Bible, in which Jesus was accused of making himself equal with God; and his answer, as we have already shown, implied that the charge was false.

If Christ was God he must have been possessed of the essential attributes of God. He must have been unoriginated, self-existent, immortal, invisible, unchangeable, omniscient, all-wise, all-good, all-powerful, and omnipresent. But Jesus disclaimed the possession of every one of these properties. He was not unoriginated—for he said, “As the Father hath life in himself, so hath he GIVEN to the Son to have life in himself.' He is not self-existent—for he said, ‘I live By the Father.' He was not immortal:—for he was once dead; and the Apostle says, that ‘He only, who is the only Potentate, hath immortality.' He was not invisible —for he was seen of all; but no one hath seen God at any time. Jesus said of God, ‘Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.' He was not unchangeable — for he experienced many of the most affecting changes to which man is liable. He increased in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man. He was hungry, and thirsty, and weary. He died and revived again. He was not omniscient—for he knew not the day, nor the hour of a certain event. He was not all-wise— sor an Apostle ascribes glory to the FATHER as the only wise God. He was not all-good —for when the young nobleman called him ‘Good Master,’ he declined the appellation saying, ‘Why callest thee me good? there is none good but one, that is God.' He was not all-powerful—for of himself he could do nothing. The mighty works which he did, he did not of himself. And he expressly said “The Father is greater than I.’. He was not omnipresent—for he said to his disciples, in relation to the family at Bethany, where Lazarus died, ‘I am glad for your sakes that I was not there.' And when he went to see the afflicted family, Martha and Mary both said to him, ‘Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.’

Finally, if Jesus is God there must be, according to the Scriptures, a Mediator between Jesus and men. “There is on ONE GOD and ONE MEDIATOR between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” Is not the Trinitarian, who asserts that the man Christ Jesus is the ONE God, under obligation to point out the ONE MEDIATOR between him and men? Will it be pretended that there is “one Mediator” between Jesus and men? If Jesus is God, he must have “so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son.” Can the Trinitarian point us to “the only begotten Son” of Jesus Christ? He certainly cannot.”

Buy: And the Word was a god: A New Book on the Most Disputed Text in the New Testament - John 1:1  and The Dark History of the Trinity, is now available on Amazon by clicking here...and both are only 99 cents

100 Rare New Testament Translations & Versions to Download (PDF Format)

Only $5.00 -  You can pay using the Cash App by sending money to $HeinzSchmitz and send me an email at theoldcdbookshop@gmail.com with your email for the download. You can also pay using Facebook Pay in Messenger

Books Scanned from the Originals into PDF format

Join my Facebook Group - Contact theoldcdbookshop@gmail.com for questions

Books are in the public domain. I will take checks or money orders as well. For a list of all of my disks, with links click here

Contents:

The New Testament from the Greek text as established by Bible Numerics by Ivan Panin 1914

A New Version of the Gospel according to Saint Matthew by Isaac de Beausobre 1816

Translation of the New Testament by WB Godbey 1902

A TRANSLATION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT from the Original Greek Humbly Attempted with a View to Assist the Unlearned by T Haweis 1795

A Literal Translation of the 8 Last Books of the New Testament by F Parker 1854

A Revised Translation of the New Testament by Henry Highton 1862

The Riverside New Testament - A Translation From The Original Greek Into The English Of To-Day by W Ballentine 1922

The Twentieth Century New Testament - a translation into Modern English made from Westcott & Hort's text 1898 Volume 1

The Twentieth Century New Testament - a translation into Modern English made from Westcott & Hort's text 1898 Volume 2

The Twentieth Century New Testament - a translation into Modern English made from Westcott & Hort's text 1898 Volume 3

The Gospels, Acts, Epistles, and book of Revelation commonly called the New Testament, a new translation from a revised text of the Greek original (Unknown Translator) 1800

The New Testament Scriptures in the order in which they were written, a very close translation from the Greek text of 1611, with brief explanations by Charles Hebert 1882

The Family Expositor - A paraphrase and version of the New Testament 1831 by Philip Doddridge

The New Testament by James Moffatt 1913

The Revised New Testament 1881

The New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ : the common English version, corrected by the final committee of the American Bible Union 1865

The New Testament by Charles Foster Kent 1918

Hebrew New Testament by Franz Delitzsch 1901

New Testament by George R Noyes 1888

The New Testament Emphasized by Horace Morrow 1897

The New Testament by HT Anderson 1865

Primitive New Testament by William Whiston 1745

The New Testament in English according to the Version by John Wycliffe 1879

The New Dispensation by Robert Weekes 1897

A Liberal Translation of the New Testament by Ed Harwood, Volume 1, 1768

A Liberal Translation of the New Testament by Ed Harwood, Volume 2, 1768

New Testament by Sylvanus Cobb 1864

The New Testament, A New and Corrected Version by R Dickinson 1833

New Testament by Gilbert Wakefield 1820

The New Testament Being the English Only of the Greek and English Testament by Abner Kneeland 1823

Heinfetter New Testament 1864

James Murdoch New Testament 1851

Jonathan Morgan New Testament 1848

Edgar Taylor New Testament 1840

New Testament by Leicester Ambrose Sawyer 1860

The New Testament in an Improved Version upon the basis of Archbishop Newcome's New Translation 1809

Richard Wynne New Testament 1764

The Epistles of Paul in Modern English by George Barker Stevens 1898

The Messages of the Apostles by George Barker Stevens 1900

The Corrected English New Testament - A Revision of the Authorised Version by Samuel Lloyd 1904

The Interlinear Literal Translation Of The Greek New Testament - Thomas Newberry, George Berry

The New Testament the Authorized Version Corrected by Edward Clarke 1913

Palfrey's New Testament in the Common Version conformed to Greisbach's Greek Text 1830

Rotherham's New Testament 1893

Samuel Sharpe's New Testament 1862

Weymouth's New Testament 1909

John Wesley New Testament 1754

The Sermon on the Mount and other extracts from the New Testament - a verbatim translation from the Greek with notes on the mystical or arcane sense by James Morgan Pryse 1904

The Chronological New Testament according to the Authorized version by Robert Bladaker 1864

The New Covenant by JW Hanson 1884

The New Testament translated from the critical text of Von Tischendorf by Samuel Davidson 1875

Tyndale's New Testament 1837

The Gospel According to St Matthew and part of the first chapter of St Mark by John Cheke 1843

The New Testament Revised and Translated by AS Worrell 1904

The Sacred Writings of the Apostles and Evangelists of Jesus Christ, commonly styled the New Testament by Alexander Campbell 1914

The Epistle of Paul, Volume 1 by Thomas Belsham 1822

The Epistle of Paul, Volume 2 by Thomas Belsham 1822

The Epistle of Paul, Volume 3 by Thomas Belsham 1822

The Epistle of Paul, Volume 4 by Thomas Belsham 1822

St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans by WG Rutherford 1900

St. Paul's epistles to the Thessalonians and to the Corinthians by WG Rutherford 1908

A Paraphrase on the Acts of the Holy Apostles, upon all the Epistles of the New Testament, and upon the Revelations by Thomas Pyle, Volume 1, 1817

A Paraphrase on the Acts of the Holy Apostles, upon all the Epistles of the New Testament, and upon the Revelations by Thomas Pyle, Volume 2, 1817

A Paraphrase on the Acts of the Holy Apostles, upon all the Epistles of the New Testament, and upon the Revelations by Thomas Pyle, Volume 3, 1817

Translation of the Gospels, Volume 1 by Andrews Norton 1856

Translation of the Gospels, Volume 2 by Andrews Norton 1856

A New Literal Translation from the Original Greek, of All the Apostolical Epistles by James MacKnight 1806

The Four Gospels, translated from the Greek, Volume 1, by George Campbell, 1837

The Four Gospels, translated from the Greek, Volume 2, by George Campbell, 1837

An Exposition of the New Testament by William Gilpin 1790

The Life and Morals Of Jesus Of Nazareth by Thomas Jefferson 1904

Daniel Mace New Testament 1729

The Commonly Received Version of the New Testament of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ with Several Hundred Emendations 1850 Edited by Spencer Houghton Cone and William Henry Wyckoff

The New Testament for English Readers Containing the Authorized Version with Marginal Corrections of Readings and Renderings, Marginal References and a Critical and Explanatory Commentary 1868 Volume 1 by Henry Alford

The New Testament for English Readers Containing the Authorized Version with Marginal Corrections of Readings and Renderings, Marginal References and a Critical and Explanatory Commentary 1868 Volume 2 by Henry Alford

The New Testament for English Readers Containing the Authorized Version with Marginal Corrections of Readings and Renderings, Marginal References and a Critical and Explanatory Commentary 1868 Volume 3 by Henry Alford

The New Testament for English Readers Containing the Authorized Version with Marginal Corrections of Readings and Renderings, Marginal References and a Critical and Explanatory Commentary 1868 Volume 4 by Henry Alford

New Testament Translated from the Latin Vulgate by Francis Patrick Kenrick 1862

A Translation of the Four Gospels from the Syriac of the Sinaitic Palimpsest Agnes Smith Lewis 1894

The Restored New Testament by James M Pryce 1914

Gospel of Matthew by WJ Aislabie 1834 (pages missing)

The Coptic Version of the New Testament, Volume 1, 1898

The Coptic Version of the New Testament, Volume 2, 1898

The Coptic Version of the New Testament, Volume 3, 1898

The Coptic Version of the New Testament, Volume 4, 1898

The gospel according to St. Mark : revised from the ancient Greek mss. unknown to the translators of the Authorized Version 1870

The Westminster version of the Sacred Scriptures, Volume 1 part 2

The Westminster version of the Sacred Scriptures, Volume 3

The Westminster version of the Sacred Scriptures, Volume 4 part 3

The Twofold New Testament by TS Green 1864

The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin F. Wilson 1864

St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians: With a Critical and Grammatical Commentary, and Revised Translation by Charles Ellicott 1864

A commentary, critical and grammatical, on St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, with a revised translation, by Charles J. Ellicott 1860

The Pastoral Epistles of St. Paul with a critical and grammatical commentary, and a revised translation 1869
by Charles J. Ellicott

St. Paul's First epistle to the Corinthians by Charles J. Ellicott

St. Paul's epistles to the Philippians, the Colossians and Philemon by Charles J. Ellicott 1888

A Critical and Grammatical Commentary on St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians by Charles J. Ellicott 1858

A Paraphrase and Notes on the Revelation of St. John by Moses Lowman 1773

The Story of the Nazarene in Annotated Paraphrase by Noah Nowles Davis 1903

Revelation, a Paraphrase by TP Briggs 1892

A Paraphrase and Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews by A. McLean 1820 Volume 1

A Paraphrase and Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews by A. McLean 1820 Volume 2

A popular paraphrase on St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans By Rev Bromehead
 gdixierose

Sharp's Rule and its Exceptions

This Kindle book, And the Word was a god: Conversations on the Most Disputed Text in the New Testament - John 1:1 is available on Amazon by clicking here

Visit a local listing for this book here

By Andrews Norton (December 31, 1786 – September 18, 1853)

The argument for the deity of Christ founded upon the omission of the Greek article was revived and brought into notice in the last century by Granville Sharp, Esq. He applied it to eight texts which will be hereafter mentioned. The last words of Ephesians v. 5 may afford an example of the construction on which the argument is founded:

EN TH BASILEIA TOU CRISTOU KAI QEOU

From the article being inserted before CRISTOU and omitted before QEOU, Mr. Sharp infers that both names relate to the same person, and renders, “in the kingdom of Christ our God.” Conformably to the manner in which he understands it, it might be rendered, “in the kingdom of him who is Christ and God.” The proper translation I suppose to be that of the Common Version, “in the kingdom of Christ and of God,” or “in the kingdom of the Messiah and of God.”

The argument of Sharp is defended by Bishop Middleton in his Doctrine of the Greek Article. By attending to the rule laid down by him, with its limitations and exceptions, we shall be able to judge of its applicability to the passages in question. His rule is this:-

“When two or more attributives, joined by a copulative or copulatives, are assumed of [relate to] the same person or thing, before the first attributive the article is inserted, before the remaining ones it is omitted.” (pp. 79, 80.)

By attributives, he understands adjectives, participles, and nouns which are significant of character, relation, and dignity.

The limitations and exceptions to the rule stated by him are as follows:—

I. There is no similar rule respecting “names of substances considered as substances.” Thus we may say hO LIQOS KAI CRUSOS (the stone and gold), without repeating the article before CRUSOS, though we speak of two different substances. The reason of this limitation of the rule is stated to be that “distinct real essences cannot be conceived to belong to the same thing”; or, in other words, that the same thing cannot be supposed to be two different substances. – In this case, then, it appears that the article is not repeated, because its repetition is not necessary to prevent ambiguity. This is the true principle which accounts for all the limitations and exceptions to the rule that are stated by Bishop Middleton and others. It is mentioned thus early, that the principle may be kept in mind; and its truth may be remarked in the other cases of limitation or of exception to be quoted.

II. No similar rule applies to proper names. “The reason,” says Middleton, “is evident at once; for it is impossible that John and Thomas, the names of two distinct persons, should be predicated of an individual.” (p. 86.) This remark is not to the purpose; for the same individual may have two names. The true reason for this limitation is, that proper names, when those of the same individual, are not connected by a copulative or copulatives, and therefore that, when they are thus connected, no ambiguity arises from the omission of the article.

III. “Nouns,” says Middleton, “which are the names of abstract ideas, are also excluded; for, as Locke has well observed, “Every distinct abstract idea is a distinct essence, and the names which stand for such distinct ideas are the names of things essentially different.” (Ibid.) It would therefore, he reasons, be contradictory to suppose that any quality were at once APEIRIA and APAIDEUSIA (inexperience and ignorance. But the names of abstract ideas are used to denote personal qualities, and the same personal qualities, as they are viewed under different aspects, may be denoted by different names. The reason assigned by Middleton is therefore without force. The true reason for the limitation is, that usually no ambiguity arises from the omission of the article before words of the class mentioned.

IV. The rule, it is further conceded, is not of universal application as it respects plurals; for, says Middleton, “Though one individual may act, and frequently does act, in several capacities, it is not likely that a multitude of individuals should all of them act in the same several capacities: and, by the ertreme improbability that they should be represented as so acting, we may be forbidden to understand the second plural attributive of the persons designed in the article prefixed to the first, however the usage in the singular might seem to countenance the construction.” (p. 90.)

V. Lastly, “we find,” he says, “in very many instances, not only in the plural, but even in the singular number, that where attributives are in their nature absolutely incompatible, i. e. where the application of the rule would involve a contradiction in terms, there the first attributive only has the article, the perspicuity of the passage not requiring the rule to be accurately observed” (p. 92.)

Having thus laid down the rule, with its limitations and exceptions, Bishop Middleton applies it to some of the passages in the New Testament adduced by Mr. Sharp in proof of the divinity of Christ. These were Acts xx. 28 (supposing the true reading to be TOU KURIOU KAI QEOU; Ephes. v. 5; 2 Thess. i. 12; 1 Tim. v. 21 (if KURIOU should be retained in the text); 2 Tim. iv. 1 (if we read TOU QEOU KAI KURIOU; Titus ii. 13; 2 Peter i. 1; Jude 4 (supposing QEOU to belong to the text). In four of these eight texts, the reading adopted to bring them within the rule is probably spurious, as may be seen by referring to Griesbach; and they are in consequence either given up, or not strongly insisted upon, by Middleton. In one of the remaining, 2 Thess. i. 12, the reading is KATA THN CARIN TOU QEOU HMWN KAI KURIOU IHSOU CRISTOU. Of this Middleton is “disposed to think that it affords no certain evidence in favor of Mr Sharp,” because he “believes that KURIOS in the form of KURIOS IHSOUS CRISTOS became as a title so incorporated with the proper name as to be subject to the same law.” (pp. 554, 564.) The three remaining texts are those on which he principally relies.

Listen to Granville Sharp's Rule Exposed

By the application of the rule to the passage last mentioned, it is inferred that Christ is called “God,” and “the great God”; and it is affirmed that the rule requires us to understand these titles as applied to him. The general answer to this reasoning is as follows.

It appears by comparing the rule with its exceptions and limitations, that it in fact amounts to nothing more than this: that when substantives, adjectives, or participles are connected together by a copulative or copulatives, if the first have the article, it is to be omitted before those which follow, when they relate to the same person or thing; and is to be inserted, when they relate to different persons or things, Except when this fact is sufficiently determined by some other circumstance. The same rule exists respecting the use of the definite article in English.

The principle of exception just stated is evidently that which runs through all the limitations and exceptions which Middleton has laid down and exemplified, and is in itself perfectly reasonable. When, from any other circumstance, it may be clearly understood that different persons or things are spoken of then the insertion or omission of the article is a matter of indifference.

But if this be true, no argument for the deity of Christ can be drawn from the texts adduced. With regard to this doctrine, the main question is, whether it were taught by Christ and his Apostles, and received by their immediate disciples. Antitrinitarians maintain that it was not; and consequently maintain that no thought of it was ever entertained by the Apostles and first believers. But if this supposition be correct, the insertion of the article in these texts was wholly unnecessary. No ambiguity could result from its omission. The imagination had not entered the minds of men, that God and Christ were the same person. The Apostles in writing, and their converts in reading, the passages in question, could have no more conception of one person only being understood, in consequence of the omission of the article, than of supposing but one substance to be meant by the terms hO LIQOS KAI CRUSOS (the stone and gold), on account of the omission of the article before CRUSOS. These texts, therefore, cannot be brought to disprove the Antitrinitarian supposition, because this supposition must be proved false, before these texts can be taken from the exception and brought under the operation of the rule. The truth of the supposition accounts for the omission of the article.

[On the subject of this note, one may further consult the able tract of the Rev. Calvin Winstanley, entitled “A Windication of Certain Passages in the Common English Version of the New Testament. Addressed to Granville Sharp, Esq.”; published in 1805, and reprinted, with additions, at Cambridge (Mass.) in 1819. See also an essay by Professor Stuart, entitled “Hints and Cautions respecting the Greek Article,” in the Biblical Repository for April 1834; and the Rev. T. S. Green’s “Grammar of the New Testament Dialect,” (London, 1842,) p. 205, seqq.,- a work containing many acute observations. Winer, in his Grammar of the New Testament Idiom, shows that there is no ground for the inference which Middleton and others would draw from the omission of the article in Titus ii. 13 and Jude 4.]

Buy on Amazon for only 99 cents by clicking here - see a local listing for this here

1723 Maryland Law for Denying the Trinity

BE IT ENACTED, by the right honourable the Lord Proprietor, by and with the advice and consent of his lordship's Governor, and the Upper and Lower Houses of Assembly, and the authority of the same, That if any person shall hereafter, within this province, wittingly maliciously and advisedly, by writing or speaking, blaspheme or curse God, or deny our Saviour Jesus Christ to be the son of God, or shall deny the Holy Trinity, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, or the Godhead of any of the Three Persons, or the Unity of the Godhead, or shall utter any profane words concerning the Holy Trinity, or any the Persons thereof, and shall be thereof convict by verdict, or confession, shall, for the first offence, be bored through the tongue, and fined twenty pounds sterling to the lord proprietor, to be applied to the use of the county where the offence shall be committed, to be levied on the offender's body, goods and chattels, lands or tenements, and in case the said fine cannot be levied, the offender to suffer six months imprisonment without bail or mainprise; and that for the second offence, the offender being thereof convict as aforesaid, shall be stigmatized by burning in the forehead with the letter B, and fined forty pounds sterling to the lord proprietor, to be applied and levied as aforesaid, and in case the same cannot be levied, the offender shall suffer twelve months imprisonment without bail or mainprise; and that for the third offence, the offender being convict as aforesaid, shall suffer death without the benefit of the clergy. 

This Kindle book, The Dark History of the Trinity, is now available on Amazon by clicking here...and it is only 99 cents

See a local listing for this book here

John 8 from Rodolphus Dickinson's New Testament 1833

Buy this published Kindle book on Amazon on Forgotten Bible Versions for only 99 cents 

Click here for a more detailed description

Rodolphus Dickinson (1787-1863), an Episcopal rector was an insufferable snob who produced a version of the New Testament agreeable to the well-born, or as he put it:

"Accomplished and refined persons...And when it is considered what an antiquated, and in other particulars forbidding aspect, the inspired writings, in their usual style and conformation, present to the view of many intelligent, refined and amiable persons, who might be induced to peruse them in a less interrupted and more inviting form, in connexion with the typographical execution here displayed, which, it is presumed, will be regarded by such, as no small improvement; can any valid objection be urged to the prevalent spirit and character of this undertaking? Why should the inestimable gift of God to man, be proffered in a mode that is unnecessarily repulsive? Why should the received translation be permitted to perpetuate, to legalize, and almost to sanctify, many and unquestionable defects? While various other works, and especially those of the most trivial attainment, are diligently adorned with a splendid and sweetly flowing diction, why should the mere, uninteresting identity and paucity of language be so exclusively employed, in rendering the word of God? Why should the Christian scriptures be divested even of decent ornament? Why should not an edition of the heavenly institutes be furnished for the reading-room, saloon, and toilet, as well as for the church, school, and nursery? for the literary and accomplished gentleman, as well as for the plain and unlettered citizen? Why should the Bible be stationary, amid the progress of refinement and letters? Why, in antique fashion, should it remain solitary, in the enchanting and illimitable field of modern improvements?"

Here is John 8 in his New Testament:

Then Jesus again said to them, I am going away, and you will seek me, but will die in your sins; where I go, you cannot come. The Jews  then said, Will he destroy himself? for he declares. Where I go, you cannot come. And he alleged to them. You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I there-fore affirmed to you, that you will die in your sins; for, if you believe not that I am from above, you will perish in your transgressions. They then said to him, Who art thou? And Jesus observed. Precisely what I have already communicated to you. I have numerous particulars to disclose, and to condemn, in relation to you: but he who sent me is worthy of belief; and I announce to the world those things which I have received from him. They did not comprehend, that he revealed to them the Father. Jesus then reminded them, When you shall have lifted up the Son of Man, you will then know that I am from above, and that I do nothing of myself; but represent these things, as my Father has instructed me. And he, who sent me, is with me. The Father has not left me alone; because I always perform what is acceptable to him. As he was making these observations, many believed in him. Jesus then remarked to those Jews, who believed him. If you continue in this doctrine of mine, you are assuredly, my disciples; and you will know the truth, and the truth will emancipate you.

Some replied to him. We are Abraham's posterity, and have never been enslaved to any man. How dost thou affirm. You shall be emancipated? Jesus answered them. In truth, I assure you, that every one who commits sin, is a slave to sin. Now the servant does not continually abide in the family; but the Son perpetually remains there. If therefore, the Son shall liberate you, you will indeed be free. I know that you are Abraham's posterity; but you endeavor to destroy me, because this my doctrine exists not in you. I pronounce that which I have witnessed with my Father; but you perform that which you have learnt from your father. They answered and said to him, Abraham is our father. Jesus says to them. If you were the children of Abraham, you would do the works of Abraham. But now you are seeking, what Abraham would not have done, to kill me; a man who has spoken to you the truth, which I have heard from God. You accomplish the objects of your father. They then said to him. We are not of contaminated descent. We have one Father, even God. Jesus stated to them. If God were your Father, you would love me; since I proceeded, and have come from God; for indeed, I have not arrived of myself, but he has sent me. Why do you not comprehend my mode of illustration. It is because you cannot endure my doctrine. You are from your father the calumniator, and the violent passions of your father you will indulge. He was a murderer from the beginning ; and continued not in the truth, because there is no veracity in him. When he utters a falsehood, it proceeds from his own disposition; for he is false, and the father of falsehood. Now I speak the truth, but you do not believe me. Which of you can convict me of sin? And if I speak the truth, why do you not believe me? He who is from God, regards the words of God. You disregard them, because you are not from God.

The Jews answered, and said to him. Have we not reason to affirm, that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a demon? Jesus replied, I have not a demon; but I honor my Father, and you dishonor me. I seek not, however, to promote my own glory; another seeks it, who judges. Indeed, I aver to you, If any one keep my word, he will never see death. The Jews then said to him, Now we are certain that thou art a
demoniac: Abraham died, and the prophets; yet thou sayest. If any one keep my word, he will never taste death. Art thou greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? The prophets are also deceased; whom dost thou think thyself to be? Jesus replied, If I commend myself, my commendation is nothing: it is my Father who commends me; of whom you assert, He is our God. Yet you do not know him; but I know him: and if I should affirm, that I know him not, I should speak falsely like you: but I know him, and keep his word. Your father Abraham earnestly desired to see my day; and he saw it, and rejoiced. The Jews then said to him. Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus observed to them, In truth, I assure you, that before Abraham was born, I existed. They then took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus concealed himself, and departed from the temple.

Is Jesus Called GOD at Romans 9:5?

This Kindle book, And the Word was a god: Conversations on the Most Disputed Text in the New Testament - John 1:1 is available on Amazon by clicking here

Visit a local listing for this book here

See also On the Construction of Romans 9:5 by Ezra Abbot 1881

"...Christ, who is God over all, forever praised. Amen." New International Version

Now compare:

"God who is over all be forever praised." NIV footnote
"...God, who is over all, [be] blessed forever. Amen." NWT
"May God, supreme above all, be blessed for ever! Amen" New English Bible
"God, who is over all be blessed for ever." Revised Standard Version
"Blessed for evermore be the God who is over all!" Moffatt
"May God, who rules over all, be praised forever!" Good News Bible/TEV
"God who is over all be blessed forever." Smith&Goodspeed's An American Translation
"May God, supreme above all, be blessed for ever! Amen" Revised English Bible
"I pray that God, who rules over all, will be praised forever!" Contemporary English Version
"He who is over all, God, blessed unto the ages." Rotherham's Emphasized Bible
"God is over everyone, Praise Him forever." Simple English Bible
"God be blessed who is above all things forever." Unvarnished NT/Andy Gaus
"God who is over all be blessed forever." New American Bible*
"God is over everyone, Praise Him forever." International English Bible
"May God, who reigns over all, be blessed through the ages." Pre-Nicene New Testament
"God be exalted throughout the Eons." Eonian Life Bible New Testament
"May God who is over all, be blessed forever." Wilton Translation New Testament

"Does Paul speak of Jesus as 'God/god'? The debate here revolves round one text in particular - Rom. 9.5...the juxtaposition of 'the Messiah' and 'he who is over all, God' would most obviously suggest different referents, rather than the same person in different status...to infer that Paul intended Rom. 9.5 as a benediction to Christ as 'God' would imply that he had abandoned the reserve which is such a mark of his talk of the exalted Christ elsewhere. And this would be no insignificant matter. For it would not allow any of the qualification outlined above in terms of God sharing his sovereignty with the exalted Christ. For 'he who is over all, God' can hardly be other than the one God, the Creator, elsewhere described by Paul (in his benedictions!) as 'the God and Father of'our Lord Jesus Christ.'" The Theology of Paul the Apostle by James D. G. Dunn

"Paul’s clear statements elsewhere, such as 1 Corinthians 8.6 and Ephesians 4.5-6, on the same subject should indicate his intent in Romans 9.5b. Plus, his constant practices of affirming strict monotheism, distinguishing Christ and God, subordinating Christ to God, and identifying only the Father as God indicate he could not have intended to call Christ “God” in Romans 9.5b." Kermit Zarley

"Rom. 9.5 is disputed. After Paul has expounded the position of Israel in salvation history and has
emphasized as an especial advantage the fact that Christ according to the flesh, stems from this people, he adds a relative clause, which runs lit. “who is over all God blessed for ever. Amen.” Even so, Christ would not be equated absolutely with God, but only described as a being of divine nature, for the word theos has no article. But this ascription of majesty does not occur anywhere else in Paul. The much more probable explanation is that the statement is a doxology directed to God, stemming from Jewish tradition and adopted by Paul. Overwhelmed by God’s dealings with Israel, Paul concludes with an ascription of praise to God. The translation would then read, 'The one who is God over all be blessed for ever. Amen.” or alternatively, “God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen.'" J. Schneider, “God” in The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, vol. 2, ed. Colin Brown, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976), p. 80.

"In facing the question of the relationship of Christ to Yahweh we must not outrun the evidence and read into Paul's language the Fourth Century definition of Christ as God the Son, co-equal and co-eternal, of one substance with the Father. Paul's language is one of the factors leading to that definition, and also part of the problem it attempted to solve, but it would be anachronistic to interpret his language in such later terms. Perhaps he preferred 'Lord' as a title because of its ambiguity, because it established Christ's relation to humanity, church, and cosmos, without too closely defining his relation to Yahweh. As a Jewish monotheist Paul would wish neither to be accused of believing in two Gods, nor that Yahweh died on the cross. The only place in the undisputed letters where he may equate Christ with God is Rom.9:5 if a full stop is not placed after 'Christ', so that it reads '...of their race...is the Christ who is God over all...' More probably it should read '....of their race...is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed....'" John Ziesler: Pauline Christianity(Revised edition 1990, Oxford University Press 'Oxford Bible Series' Page 44)

"The description, God over all, cannot be understood of our Lord Jesus Christ without violence to the analogy of St Paul's doctrine, and inconsistence with his habitual use of language. ["Had St Paul ever spoken of Christ as God, he would many times have spoken of Him as such, not once only, and that by accident."—Professor Jowett's Commentary.] In Romans iii. 29, 30, he reminds us, the One God is God of both Jews and Gentiles, and so implies His highest dominion over all men; and, in xi. 3G, he asserts the exclusive supremacy of God the Father, by declaring, of (from) Him., and through Him, and to Him, are all things. Elsewhere, he calls God the only God, and the Blessed and Only Potentate. (Romans xvi. 27; 1 Timothy i. 17; vi. 15.) He tells us 'That there is to us (Christians) but One God, the Father, of (from) Whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through Him' (1 Cor. viii. 4-6); and again, that there is One God and Father of all, Who is over all, &c.; and yet again, that God is the Head of Christ (Eph. iv. 6 ; 1 Cor. xi. 3). A number of other passages might be cited, showing the subordination of Christ, and the consequent improbability that St Paul would term Him God over all; and almost every page of the Apostle's writings might be appealed to for proof that, in his view, God and Christ were distinct individuals, possessing different natures, and not Forms in One and the same Supreme, Self-existent Essence; and, although the term QEOS (God), may, without the article, mean less than absolute Deity, yet it is not, in the diction of St Paul, once given simply, and without qualification, to Christ."
An Examination of Canon Liddon's Bampton Lectures on the Divinity of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ By Charles Voysey 1871

Frederick W. Danker in Concordia Theological Monthly Vol. XXXII, No. 6, June 1961, pp. 337, reviewing the New English Bible, under a subheading "Syntax" says;
"Does [ho on] in Romans 9:5 go with [theos], which follows, or with [ho Christos], which precedes? To charge either RSV or NEB with wilful refusal to support the doctrine of the deity of Jesus Christ because they interpret the latter half of the verse as an independent doxology would be indicative not only of uncharitable judgement but also of profound ignorance of the entire subject of Pauline theology...."
.................................

*"Some editors punctuate this verse differently and prefer the translation, 'Of whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is god over all.' However, Paul's point is that God who is over all aimed to use Israel, which had been entrusted with every privilege, in outreach to the entire world through the Messiah." Romans 9:5 footnote, New American Bible w/Revised New Testament and Revised Psalms

Buy on Amazon for only 99 cents by clicking here - see a local listing for this here

Praise for the New World Translation Bible

There are excellent books that deal with, and often defend the New World Translation, such as Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament by Jason David BeDuhn  and The Role of Theology and Bias in Bible Translation: With a Special Look at the New World Translation of Jehovah's Witnesses by Rolf Furuli  and Jehovah's Witnesses Defended: An Answer to Scholars & Critics by Greg G. Stafford and Your Word Is Truth By A. Byatt & H. Flemings and to a lesser extent Alan S. Duthie's How to Choose Your Bible Wisely and Bible Translations and How to Choose Between Them who states that the NWT "is no more 'full of heresies' than any other translation" and "If you belong to a small group of serious students of the Bible who are trying to appreciate to learn the Hebrew or Greek languages, then you will appreciate the value of a 'crib' or 'gloss' translation, especially an interlinear one, or a relatively word-for-word one like the NASB, KJ2, NWT, YOUNG, DARBY, RV, DOUAY, Concordant." and "for detailed word-studies and similar interests in the original languages, we suggest either a very literal version like NAS, NWT, LTB-KJ2; or preferably an interlinear version [Kingdom {Interlinear Translation}, Marshall]. Duthie discusses the NWT on an even plane with other Bible versions.

The following quotes should not impress upon the reader that these scholars agree with all aspects of the NWT Bible:

The page at https://restitutio.org/2015/11/05/translating-the-holy-spirit/ stated that most Bible translations get it wrong when it comes to translation the holy spirit, and go on to write: "the only translations that differ on this point are the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation and the Roman Catholic’s New American Bible—the very two sources that evangelicals and Protestants are trained never to trust! In fact, the New World Translation does not even appear on major Bible websites (or in BibleWorks), so access to it is limited."

Isreali Professor Benjamin Kedar writes: "Several years ago I quoted the so-called New World Translation among several Bible versions in articles that deal with purely philological questions (such as the rendition of the causitive hiphil, of the participle qotel). In the course of my comparative studies I found the NWT rather illuminating: it gives evidence of an acute awareness of the structural characteristics of Hebrew as well as of an honest effort to faithfully render these in the target language. A translation is bound to be a compromise, and as such its details are open to criticism; this applies to the NWT too. In the portion corresponding the the Hebrew Bible, however, I have never come upon an obviously erroneous rendition which would find its explanation in a dogmatic bias. Repeatedly I have asked the antagonists of the Watchtower-Bible who turned to me for a clarification of my views, to name specific verses for a renewed scrutiny. This either was not done or else the verses submitted (e.g. Genesis 4:13; 6:3; 10:9; 15:5; 18:20; etc.) did not prove the point, namely, a tendentious translation."
It should be pointed out that that Professor Kedar does not "feel sympathy for any sect and this includes Jehovah's Witnesses."

BENJAMIN KEDAR adds:  (Benjamin Kedar is a professor at Hebrew University in Israel). "In my linguistic research in connection with the Hebrew Bible and translations, I often refer to the English edition of what  is known as the New World Translation.  In so doing, I find my feeling repeatedly confirmed that this work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible.  Giving evidence of a broad command of the original language, it renders the original words into a second language understandably without deviating unnecessarily from the specific structure of the Hebrew...Every statement of language allows for a certain latitude in interpreting or translation. So the linguistic solution in any given case may be open to debate. But I have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain."

Buy this published Kindle book on Amazon on Forgotten Bible Versions for only 99 cents  and Buy Forgotten Tales of Dogs - 60 Chapters of Dogs in Legend, Lore, Love, Loyalty and Intelligence for only 99 cents

Other Favourable Comments on the NWT.

J.D. PHILLIPS:  (J.D. Phillips was a Church of Christ Minister, schooled in the original tongues). "Last week I purchased a copy of your New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures of which I take pride in being an owner. You have done a marvelous work...I was happy, indeed, to see the name Jehovah in it. But you have made a marvelous step in the right direction, and I pray God that your Version will be used to His glory.  What you have done for the Name alone is worth all the effort and cost!"

ALLEN WIKGREN:  (Allen Wikgren was on the New Revised Standard Version committee, as well as on the committee which  produced the UBS Greek text). "Independent readings of merit often occur in other modern speech versions, such as...the Jehovah's Witnesses edition of the New Testament(1950)." (The Interpreter's Bible, 1952 Vol. 1 page 99)

S. MACLEAN GILMORE:  "In 1950 the Jehovah's Witnesses published their New World Translation of the New Testament, and the preparation of the New World Old Testament is now far advanced. The New Testament edition was made by a committee...that possessed an unusual competence in Greek." (The Andover Newton Quarterly, September 1966, Vol 7, #1 page 25, 26)

C. HOUTMAN: Mr. Houtman notes that on the point of translator bias "the New World Translation of the Jehovah's Witnesses can survive the scrutiny of criticism." (Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift, [Dutch Theological Magazines] 38 1984, page  279-280)

WILLIAM CAREY TAYLOR: (William C. Taylor was a Southern Baptist Minister schooled in the original tongues). "Just when the infidel universities of this land thought they had laughed out of court the very name Jehovah, up...surges.."Jehovah's Witnesses". ...And with considerable scholarship they get out their own New Testament and lo and behold, they put Jehovah into the New Testament two or three hundred times...It ought to be there [in the entire Bible] many times" (The New Bible Pro and Con, 1955 Page 75)

CHARLES FRANCIS POTTER: "the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures...the anonymous translators have certainly rendered the best manuscript texts...with scholarly ability and acumen."   (The Faith Men Live By, 1954,  Page 239)

EDGAR J. GOODSPEED:  (Edgar J. Goodspeed was a Professor of Greek at the University of Chicago, and also translated the New Testament portion of "The Bible an American Translation"). "I am...much pleased with the free, frank and vigorous translation. It exhibits a vast array of sound serious learning, as I can testify." (Personal Letter to Arthur Goux of Brooklyn Bethel, December 8, 1950; See also Watchtower September 1, 1952 page 541, where Goodspeed is quoted as stating that the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures was "an interesting and scholarly work")

ROBERT M. MCCOY:  "The translation of the New Testament is evidence of the presence in the movement of scholars qualified to deal intelligently with the many problems of Biblical translation." (The Andover Newton Quarterly, January 1963, Vol. 3, #3, Page 31)

STEVEN T. BYINGTON:  (Steven T. Byington translated the version known as "The Bible in Living English"). "If you are digging for excellent or suggestive renderings this is among the richer mines." (Christian Century,  "Review of the  New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, November 1, 1950 page
1296)

JASON BEDUHN:  (Jason Beduhn teaches at the University of Indiana). "I have just recently completed teaching a course for the Religious Studies Department of Indiana University, Bloomington, ...This is primarily a course in the Gospels. Your help came in the form of copies of the Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures which my students used as one of the textbooks for the class. These small volumes were invaluable to the course and very popular with my students...Simply put, it is the best interlinear New Testament available. I am a trained scholar of the Bible, familiar with the texts and tools in use in modern biblical studies, and by the way, not a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses. But I know a quality publication when I see one, and your 'New World Bible Translation Committee' has done its job well. Your interlinear English rendering is accurate and consistent to an extreme that forces the reader to come to terms with the linguistic, cultural, and conceptual gaps between the   Greek-speaking world and our own. Your 'New World Translation' is a high quality, literal translation that avoids traditional glosses in its faithfulness to the Greek. It is, in many ways, superior to the most successful translations in use today."

The Harper Collins Bible Dictionary calls it one of the "major translations of the Bible into English," along with the Knox translation, the Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible and the New English Bible. p. 292

ALEXANDER THOMPSON: "The translation is evidently the work of skilled and clever scholars, who have sought to bring out as much of the true sense of the Greek text as the English language is capable of expressing."  (The Differentiator,  April 1952,  Page 52)

THOMAS N. WINTER:  (Thomas N. Winter taught Greek at the University of Nebraska). "I think it is a legitimate and highly useful aid toward the mastery of koine (and classical) Greek. After examining a copy, I equipped several interested second-year Greek students with it as an auxiliary test.  After learning the proper pronunciations, a motivated student could probably learn koine from this source alone. ...the translation by the anonymous committee is thoroughly up to date and consistently accurate. ...In sum, when a witness comes to the door, the classicist, Greek student, or Bible student alike would do well to place an order." (The Classical Journal, "The Kingdom Interlinear",  April-May 1974,  pages 375, 376)

F.F. BRUCE: "The New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures (1950), followed by the New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (1953 and following years), is a publication of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Inc., and some of its distinctive renderings reflect the biblical interpretations which we have come to associate with Jehovah's Witnesses (e.g., "the Word was a god" in John 1:1). Sometimes it renders the text with an un-English literalness (e.g., "Let continue yours what is yours" in Gen. 33:9); at other times we find such colloquial phraseology as "Excuse me, Jehovah" (Ex. 4:10) and "the Nile river will fairly stink" (Ex. 7:18). Some of the renderings which are free from a theological tendency strike one as quite good; thus "a jealous God" is "a God exacting exclusive devotion", and the Hebrew phrase which the AV variously renders as "on this side Jordan" according to the context appears as "in the region of Jordan" (The English Bible 184).

ROBERT M. PRICE: The two most neutral, Greek-faithful translations (according to Jason Beduhn) turn out to be the Roman Catholic New American Bible and the Jehovah’s Witnesses New World Translation, a reworking of the American Standard Bible.*
http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/reviews/beduhn_truth.htm ... see also https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=V3teB0N-ink

*The NWT is NOT a reworking of the American Standard Bible.

Buy: And the Word was a god: A New Book on the Most Disputed Text in the New Testament - John 1:1  and The Dark History of the Trinity, is now available on Amazon by clicking here...and both are only 99 cents

Christology & the Trinity Doctrine - Over 320 Books to Download

Only $12.99 - You can pay using the Cash App by sending money to $HeinzSchmitz and send me an email at theoldcdbookshop@gmail.com with your information. You can also pay using Facebook Pay in Messenger

Books Scanned from the Originals into PDF format

For a list of all of my books click here - Contact theoldcdbookshop@gmail.com for questions

Books are in the public domain. I will take checks or money orders as well.

Contents (created on a Windows computer):

Some Burning Questions Pertaining to the Messiahship of Jesus and Christology, Why Jews do not accept them by Louis Weiss 1904

The Divinity of Jesus Christ: An Exposition by Egbert Coffin Smyth 1893

God Incarnate by HT Kingdon 1890

Jesus Christ Our Lord, an English bibliography of Christology comprising over 5000 titles annotated and classified by SG Ayres 1906

The divinity of Our Lord by George Funkhouser 1902

The Person of Christ, the Perfection of his Humanity Viewed as a Proof of his Divinity by Philip Schaff 1880

What is the truth about Jesus Christ? Problems of Christology by Friedrich Loofs 1913

Christology, a Discourse Concerning Christ by Robert Felming Volume 1 1705

Christology, a Discourse Concerning Christ by Robert Felming Volume 2 1705

The Glory of Christ as God-Man by Isaac Watts 1795

Jesus Christ God-Man by John Guyse 1719

Isaac Newton on the Problem with 1 Timothy 3:16 and 1 John 5:7

Christ in type and Prophecy by Anthony Maas 1893

How is the Divinity of Jesus depicted in the Gospels and Epistles by Thomas Whitelaw 1883

The Divinity of Christ by Emile Bougaud 1901

The Divinity Of Christ by Edward Ames 1911

The Divinity Of Christ by Joseph Rickaby 1906

The Doctrine of the Person of Jesus Christ by Hugh Ross MacKintosh 1912

The Humiliation of Christ by A.Bruce 1876

Belief in the Divinity of Jesus Christ by Rev. Didon 1894

St. John the author of the fourth Gospel by C.E. Luthardt 1875

The Divinity Of Christ by A.T. Robertson

Short Reasons for Belief in the Divinity of Christ by a Lady of Title 1843

Summa Theologica Volume 1 by St Thomas Aquinas

Summa Theologica Volume 2 by St Thomas Aquinas

Summa Theologica Volume 3 by St Thomas Aquinas

Summa Theologica Volume 4 by St Thomas Aquinas

The Kenotic Theory by Francis Hall 1898

A Vindication of the Divinity of Jesus Christ by John Baillie 1789

An Appeal to the New Testament in proof of the Divinity of the Son of God by Charles Hawtrey 1794

The Scripture Doctrine of the Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ by John Mitchel 1828

Jehovah-Jesus: The Oneness of God: the True Trinity by Robert D Weeks - 1880

Jehovah-Jesus by Thomas Whitelaw - 1913

The Doctrine of the Holy Trinity, and the manner of our Saviour's Divinity, as they are held in the Catholic Church and the Church of England by Stephen Nye 1701

Why God became Man by Leslie Walker 1921

An Examination of Mr. Robinson of Cambridge's Plea for the Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ by T. Lindsey 1785

The Safe Side, a Theistic Refutation of the Divinity of Christ by Richard Mitchel 1893

Jehovah-Jesus: Scripture studies of seven sayings of our Lord in the Gospel by Alexander Macleod Symington - 1876

Jehovah Elohim. Trinitarian and unitarian sermons by Edward John Turnour - 1831

Remarks on the uses of the definitive article in the Greek text of the New Testament By Granville Sharp

A Vindication of Certain Passages - an Address to Granville Sharp by Calvin Winstanley

1 JOHN V. 7 AND LUTHER’S GERMAN BIBLE By Ezra Abbot [From the Christian Intelligencer for May 15, 1879]

ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF TITUS II. 13 by Ezra Abbot 1881

ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF ROMANS IX. 5. by Ezra Abbot

Ezra Abbot on Acts 20:28

A discussion among upwards of 250 theological inquirers by Ranley 1864
"REV. J. SUCKLING. Has anyone, Mr. Chairman, yet broached the Three heavenly Witnesses? What can the Unitarians make of that formidable and unanswerable Text ?
Chairman, The Three heavenly Witnesses have not been introduced, Mr. Suckling; though, of course, familiar to all present.
SUCKLING. Well then, I put it to the Unitarians to say, what possesses them, to deny the Trinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, so plainly made known in the New testament.
REV. H. BROOKE. I peremptorily deny, that any mention whatever is made of the incongruous Trinity in the Bible ; I also deny that any mention is made in the New testament of the so called Three heavenly Witnesses, to which Mr. Suckling so confidently alludes.
SUCKLING. Do you hear that, Mr. Chairman ?
Chairman. Yes, Sir; distinctly.
SUCKLING. Why, Sir, it is the very cornerstone of the rock of my faith! I rest my belief of the holy Trinity, on that very foundation; on that very emphatic text.
MR. S.WESLEY. Then, we shall soon make aUnitarian of you, Mr. Suckling; for, instead of rock, you will find your foundation is resting on sand, which we shall speedily wash away from under you. [Hear, hear!]
SUCKLING. My foundation, Sir, rests on God's own Word —
There are Three that bear record in heaven ; the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these Three are One".
This text is my proof, my incontestible proof, of the holy, blessed, and glorious Trinity; "which Faith, except one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt, he shall perish everlastingly!"
G. CANNING, ESQ. I hope not, Mr. Suckling ; as I can never again believe in the Trinity, be the peril what it may. Happily, no mention is made of your pagan Trinity in either the Jewish or Christian scriptures; nor does any such popish and self-contradictory text as you pretend to quote, form part or parcel of the New covenant — the Christian's special guide. I presume,
Mr. Chairman, the reason for its not having been brought forward at an earlier stage of the Discussion, arose from the general conviction among our Trinitarian friends, that the passage is spurious — an interpolation, abominable falsification of the Scriptures, not to be found in any accredited Manuscript; a gross imposition on the credulity of mankind! and I trust Mr. Suckling may be the only religious Instructor present, who attaches any importance to the heterogeneous and foolish words."

The Creative Christ - a Study of the Incarnation in terms of Modern Thought by Edward Drown 1922

The Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ from Pascal 1898

Bible Doctrine: A Treatise on the Great Doctrines of the Bible, Pertaining by Daniel Kauffman 1914

The Corruptions of the New Testament by Horace Lorenzo Hastings 1884

The Divinity of Our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ Demonstratively Proved by MD Talbot 1843

The Divinity of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ: Eight Lectures by Henry Liddon 1884

The Christ, the Evidence of His Divinity Reviewed from the Standpoint of a Lawyer by Thomas Jerome 1917

Christ the Divine Man, or Deity Veiled by Edward Heaton 1880

History of the Dogma of the Deity of Jesus Christ by Albert Réville 1905

Our Lord, Belief in the Deity of Christ 1908 by E.F. Karl Muller

Studies in John's Gospel - the Gospel of Christ's Deity by David Gregg 1891

A Vindication of the Doctrine of Scripture Concerning the Deity of Christ by John Jamieson 1794 Volume 2

The Mormon Doctrine of Deity by Brigham Henry Roberts

Is Jesus God? by B.B. Warfield 1912

The Deity of Jesus Christ Essential to the Christian Religion by Jacques Abbadie 1777

Letters on the Trinity and on the Divinity of Christ by Moses Stuart 1834

The Suffering-Man-God or The divinity of Jesus Christ resplendent in His sufferings by Father Seraphin 1905

A Series of Sermons on the Divinity of Christ by Thomas Robbins 1820

The Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ Asserted and Proved by Sinclare Kelburn 1795

Twelve Lectures on the Acts of the Apostles to which is added a new edition of Five Lectures on the Gospel of St. John as bearing testimony to the Divinity of Jesus Christ 1828

Contributions to Christology by Emmanuel Bonavia 1869

Some Thoughts on Christology by James Drummond 1902

The Christology of Jesus by James Stalker 1899

Christology of the Old Testament by Ernst Wilhelm Hegstenberg Volume 1 1836

Christology of the Old Testament by Ernst Wilhelm Hegstenberg Volume 2 1836

Christology of the Old Testament by Ernst Wilhelm Hegstenberg Volume 3 1836

Christology, a dogmatic treatise on the Incarnation by Rev. Joseph Pohle 1913

The Incarnation - a study of Philippians 2:5-11 by EH Gifford and Henry Wace 1911

The Christology in the Apostolic Fathers by Alonzo Stark 1912

The Pre-existence of Jesus Christ as declared in the Old and New Testament by Joseph Alderson 1832

Does Hellenism Contribute Constituent Elements to Paul's Christology by John Bailey 1905

Outline of New Testament Christology, a Study of Genetic Relationships within the Christology of the New Testament Period by John Granbery 1909

The Christology of St. Paul by S. Nowell Rostron 1912

A Critical History of the Evolution of Trinitarianism, and its Outcome in the New Christology by Levi Paine 1900

Christology and Personality by William Sanday 1911

The True Divinity of Jesus Christ by John Barnard 1761

A Seal upon the Lips of Unitarians, Trinitarians who refuse to acknowledge the sole, Supreme, and Exclusive Divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Robert Hindmarsh 1815

Tracts in Controversy with Dr. Priestley upon the Historical Question of the belief of the first ages in Our Lord's Divinity by Samuel Horsley 1789

The Soteriology of the New Testament by William Dubose 1892

The Divinity of the Son of God Defended by John Claggett 1719

Jesus Christ, the Word Incarnate - Considerations from St Thomas Aquinas 1904

God as Triune, Creator, Incarnate, Atoner by William Gairdner 1916

The Doctrine of the Incarnation by Robert L. Ottley 1896

The Philosophy of the Incarnation by Bishop Garrett 1891

The Philosophy of the Fourth Gospel, a Study of the Logos-doctrine by JS Johnston 1909

St. Athanasius on the Incarnation 1891

Dissertations on Subjects Connected with the Incarnation by Charles Gore 1907

On the Incarnation of the Eternal Word by Marcus Dods 1831

Emmanuel or The incarnation of the Son of God the foundation of Immutable Truth Michael Ferrebee Sadler 1879

Lux Mundi: A Series of Studies in the Religion of the Incarnation by Charles Gore 1890

The Christian View of God and the World as Centring in the Incarnation by James Orr 1893

The One Christ - an Enquiry into the manner of the Incarnation by Frank Weston 1907

The Incarnation of the Lord by Charles Briggs 1902

The Epistle to the Hebrews: The Greek Texts with Notes and Essays by B.F. Westcott 1892
Great discussion of the LOGOS and prefers the translation "God is thy throne" at Hebrews 1:8. p.24

Who was Jesus by Redford Watkinson 1867

Moses and Christ: The plan of the World's Salvation illustrated by Bible Allegories 1888 by John H Paton

Jesus as Abaddon by Heinz Schmitz

A Reply to Dr Ralph Wilson - Jesus as the Archangel Michael by Heinz Schmitz

The Angel of the Lord: Manifestations of Christ in the Old Testament by William Pakenham Walsh 1876

Arius Slain and Socinus mortally wounded: by scripturally proving a plurality of persons in the Godhead, that Jesus Christ has all the divine names applied to him, and that he is essentially Christ, the wisdom and the power of the Godhead 1792 by Captain Tomlin

Arius the Libyan; a romance of the primitive church by Nathan Chapman Kouns 1914

The Arian movement in England (1913) by James Hay Colligan

The True Scripture doctrine of the holy and ever-blessed Trinity, stated and defended, in opposition to the Arian scheme 1727 by Abraham Taylor

An Impartial View of the Principal Difficulties that affect the Trinitarian, or clog the Arian, scheme, 1721, by Joseph Pyke

A Treatise proving the proper Divinity of Christ: in which the doctrine of the Scriptures, touching that grand Article of faith, is impartially considered; the chief objections against it answered; and the principal texts of the Scripture urged by the Arian and Socinian, are examined; first delivered in five sermons by Aaron Pitt 1719

Select treatises of Saint Athanasius in controversy with the Arians 1900 Volume 1

Select treatises of Saint Athanasius in controversy with the Arians 1842 Volume 2

Select treatises of Saint Athanasius in controversy with the Arians 1842 Volume 8

Select treatises of Saint Athanasius in controversy with the Arians 1842 Volume 19

The Divinity of the Son of God defended, or a solution of Mr. Chubb's sophisms, and a detection of the blasphemies and absurdities contained in his observations on a book entituled, Arianism anatomized: with a full and clear refutation of all the arguments contained in the same observations, and in his supremacy asserted by John Claggett 1719

The Socinian Controversy Discuss'd : wherein the chief of the Socinian tracts (publish'd of late years here) are consider'd by Leslie Charles 1708

Discourses on the principal points of the Socinian controversy by Ralph Wardlaw 1815

Some account of the Council of Nicea, in connexion with the life of Athanasius by John Kaye 1853

Is God a trinity? by the Rev. John Miller 1922

The Nicene Creed by A. E. Burn 1909

A Short Explanation of the Nicene Creed, for the use of Persons Beginning the Study of Theology by A.P. Forbes 1852

The Nicene and Apostles' Creeds: their Literary History: together with an account of the growth and reception of the sermon on the faith, commonly called "The Creed of St. Athanasius" by C.A. Swainson 1875

Faith in the Holy Trinity, the Doctrine of the Gospel, and Sabellian Unitarianism shewn to be "The God-denying Apostacy": in a connected series of letters By William Hales 1818

The Catholic Doctrine of a Trinity
TO "WHICH IS ADDED, A LETTER TO THE COMMON PEOPLE, or ANSWER TO SOME POPULAR ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE TRINITY.
by William Jones 1838

The Scripture-doctrine of the Trinity: In Three Parts by Samuel Clarke 1712

The importance of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity asserted, inreply to some late pamphlets by Daniel Waterland 1800

The Ethnic Trinities and Their Relations to the Christian Trinity by Levi Leonard Paine 1901

A Scriptural Defence of the Doctrine of the Trinity: Or a Check to Modern Arianism by Hiram Mattison 1848

Visual Representations of the Trinity: An Historical Survey by John Brainerd MacHarg 1917

An Essay on the Doctrine of the Trinity: Attempting to Prove it by Reason by James Kidd 1815 (first 570 pages)
 
The Divine Trinity: A Dogmatic Treatise by Joseph Pohle, Arthur Preuss 1911

An Unpublished Essay of Edwards on the Trinity by Jonathan Edwards, George Park Fisher 1903

Questions Awakened by the Bible: Are Souls Immortal? Was Christ in Adam" Is God a Trinity? by John Miller 1877

The Scriptural Doctrine of the Trinity by M W Alford 1842

The Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity Vindicated: In Opposition to Mr. Watts by Abraham Taylor 1728

The Trinity and the Incarnation by Richard Acland Armstrong 1904

Biblical Trinity by Theophilus 1850
 
Trinitarian Sermons Preached to a Unitarian Congregation by William Leonard Gage 1859

A New Plea for the Authenticity of the Text of the Three Heavenly Witnesses
by Charles Forster, Richard Porson 1867

A Defense of the Nicene creed by George Bull, Edward Burton 1852 (Volume 2)

The most holy Trinity by Ebenezer Soper 1853

Critical Essays by Ezra Abbot

Concessions of Trinitarians being a Selection of Extracts from the Writings of the Most Eminent Biblical Critics and Commentators, by John Wilson, (1842)

Statement of Reasons for Not Believing the Doctrines of Trinitarians concerning the Nature of God and the Person of Christ (1886) by Andrews Norton (1786-1853).

God the Invisible King by H.G. Wells (Anti-Trinity) in .txt format

AN APPEAL TO PIOUS TRINITARIANS BY HENRY GREW (1857) in .txt format (works well in wordpad and most text editors)

Seven Conversations on the Trinity (between a Jehovah's Witness minister and a Trinitarian Christian (searchable pdf format)

The Biblical Doctrine of the Trinity by Benjamin B. Warfield (in .txt format, works well in Wordpad)

Studies of Arianism by Henry Melville Gwatkin MA, 1900, 170 page book in djvu format

The following books have different interpretations of John 1:1:

Contents:

A Calm Inquiry Into the Scripture Doctrine Concerning the Person of Christ
by Thomas Belsham - 1817 - 337 pages

Newcome's corrected New Testament 1808

Johannes Greber New Testament

Hermann Heinfetter's New Testament
"In commencing this dispensation, the commans was existing, yet the command was with the God, as the command had relation to a God.

A Critical History of the Evolution of Trinitarianism: And Its Outcome in the New Christology
by Levi Leonard Paine- 1900 - 380 pages
 
Unitarianism the Doctrine of the Gospel: A View of the Scriptural Grounds of ...
by Lant Carpenter

Antitrinitarian Biography: Or, Sketches of the Lives and Writings of ...
by Robert Wallace - Unitarian Universalist churches - 1850

St. Matthew's gospel, with the parallel passages in the other evangelists ... - Page 331
edited by James Stark - 1878
The correct translation is: ' In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was WITH
THE GOD, and the Word WAS A GOD ; he was in a beginning WITH THE GOD. ...
 
The Four Gospels Translated from the Greek, with Preliminary Dissertations
by George Campbell - 1837
Others maintain that QEOS here should be translated "a God was the word.'

The Freewill Baptist Quarterly - 1866
We open to John 1: 1—5, and copy the word for word translation:—"In a beginning
was the word, and the word was with the God, and a God was the word. ...
 
What is the Truth about Jesus Christ?: Problems of Christology
by Friedrich Loofs - 1913 - 235 pages

Discourses on the Principal Points of the Socinian Controversy
by Ralph Wardlaw - 1828 - 550 pages

One God in One Person Only: And Jesus Christ a Being Distinct from God
by John Sherman - 1805 - 190 pages

Unitarianism Defined: The Scripture Doctrine of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost
by Frederick Augustus Farley  1860 - 260 pages

A Discourse on Denying the Lord Jesus.
by Bernard Whitman - 1827
In fact, there can be but one Archangel, that is, one head messenger, and who
dare to say that Jesus Christ is not the head messenger ? ...

The Testament of Jesus
by Edward Vaughan Hyde Kenealy - 1901 - 140 pages
16 John answered them, saying, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
a God, and the Word was the sacred Spirit of God. ...

The English Works of Raja Rammohun Roy: With an English Translation of ... - Page 831
by Rammohun Roy- 1906 - 978 pages
1, " the word was a God" ? We may, however, easily account for this inconsistency.
The term " God " in, Exodus is applied to Moses, the notion of whose ...

The Following Books are about Unitarianism:

The Unitarian (periodical) 1834

Old and New Unitarian Belief by John White Chadwick, 1894 - 246 pages

Unitarian Principles Confirmed by Trinitarian Testimonies
by Octavius Brooks Frothingham, John Wilson - 1880 - 588 pages

The Unitarian Review
edited by Charles Lowe, Henry Wilder Foote, John Hopkins Morison, Henry H. Barber, James De Normandie, Joseph Henry Allen - 1875

Unitarian Thought by Ephraim Emerton - 1911 - 309 pages

The Unitarian Miscellany and Christian Monitor
by Jared Sparks, Francis William Pitt Greenwood - Unitarianism - 1824
 
The Unitarian Review and Religious Magazine by Charles Lowe, Henry Wilder Foote, John Hopkins Morison, Henry H. Barber, James De Normandie - 1874

Ezra Stiles Gannett, Unitarian Minister in Boston, 1824-1871: A Memoir by William Channing Gannett - 1893 - 564 pages

The Unitarian: A Monthly Magazine of Liberal Christianity
edited by Jabez Thomas Sunderland, Brooke Herford, Frederick B. Mott - 1897

American Unitarianism, Or, A Brief History of the Progress and Present State of the Unitarian Church
by Thomas Belsham, James Freeman, William Wells - 1816

Our Unitarian Gospel by Minot Judson Savage - 1898 - 282 pages

Tracts of the American Unitarian Association
by American Unitarian Association - 1834
A collection of essays by different authors from the Tracts of the American Unitarian Association, 11th series and miscellaneous series (1827- )

An Historical Sketch of the Unitarian Movement Since the Reformation
by Joseph Henry Allen - 1894 - 242 pages

Manual of Unitarian Belief by James Freeman Clarke, Kate Gannett Wells - Unitarianism - 1906 - 64 pages

Manual of Unitarian Belief
by James Freeman Clarke, Kate Gannett Wells - Unitarianism - 1906 - 64 pages

Early Sources of English Unitarian Christianity
by Gaston Bonet-Maury, Edward Potter Hall - 1884 - 291 pages

Unitarian Affirmations: Seven Discourses Given in Washington, D.C.
by Frederic Henry Hedge - 1879 - 175 pages

Popular Objections to Unitarian Christianity Considered and Answered
by George Washington Burnap - 1848 - 166 pages

The Year-book of the Unitarian Congregational Churches by American Unitarian Association - 1892

An History of Early Opinions Concerning Jesus Christ: Compiled from Original Writers proving that the Christian Church was at first Unitarian
by Joseph Priestley - 1786

American Unitarian Biography: Memoirs of Individuals who Have Been In the Cause of Liberal Christianity
edited by William Ware - 1851

The Unitarian Advocate - 1828

Liberal Religious Thought at the Beginning of the Twentieth Century
by William Copeland Bowie - 1901 - 354 pages

Hymns for Church and Home: And Unitarian Service Book - 1903 - 426 pages

Authentic Report of the Discussion on the Unitarian Controversy
by John Scott Porter, Daniel Bagot - 1834 - 203 pages

Remarks on the Unitarian Belief: With a Letter to a Unitarian Friend on the Lord's Supper
by Nehemiah Adams - 1832 - 175 pages
Reviews of On the formation of Christian character and 0utline of Scripture testimony against the Trinity by Henry Ware

An Inquiry Into the Comparative Moral Tendency of Trinitarian and Unitarian Doctrines
by Jared Sparks - 1823 - 418 pages

The Unitarian Advocate and Religious Miscellany - 1831

A Century of Village Unitarianism: Being a History of the Reformed Christian Unitarian Church of Trenton NJ
by Charles Graves - 1904 - 194 pages

A Half-century of the Unitarian Controversy by George Edward Ellis - 1857 - 511 pages

The New Discussion of the Trinity by Frederic Dan Huntington, Thomas Starr King, Orville Dewey, American Unitarian Association - 1860 - 244 pages

Antitrinitarian Biography: Or, Sketches of the Lives and Writings of Distinguished AntiTrinitarians. by Robert Wallace 1850

Views of Sabellius, article in The Biblical Repository and Classical Review 1835

An Inquiry into the Heresies of the Apostolic Age by Edward Burton 1829

Primitive Trinitarianism by Elijah Bailey 1826 (poor quality)

A Manual of Christian doctrine by John S Banks 1897

Principles of Sabellianism, article in The Unitarian Advocate and Religious Miscellany 1830

The Two Natures and Recent Christological Speculation, article in The American Journal of Theology 1910

The Person of Christ According to the Older Theologians of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, article in The Mercersburg Review 1849

The True Believers Defence Against Charges Preferred by Trinitarians for not Believing in the Trinity by Charles Morgridge 1837

A Defence of Modern Calvinism by Edward Williams 1812

The Personality of Christ by Father Anscar Vonier 1916

A Treatise on Christian Doctrine, Volume 1 by John Milton 1825

A Treatise on Christian Doctrine, Volume 2 by John Milton 1825

Testimonies of the Fathers of the First Four Centuries by Henry Cary 1835

The Philosophy of the Supernatural, article in The American Catholic Quarterly Review 1876

A Critical Dissertation on the Athanasian Creed by GBW Ommanney 1897

The Nature of God - a series of lectures by John Hall 1910

An Inquiry into the Doctrine of the Eternal Sonship of our Lord Jesus Christ by Richard Treffry 1837

The Kenosis or Humiliation of Christ, by Henry C Vedder, article in the Baptist Review 1880

A Defence of the Nicene Creed out of the extant writings of the Catholick Doctors who Flourishsed during the 3 First Centuries of the Christian Church by John Bull 1851 Volume 1

A Defence of the Nicene Creed out of the extant writings of the Catholick Doctors who Flourishsed during the 3 First Centuries of the Christian Church by John Bull 1851 Volume 2

The Humiliation of Christ in its Physical, Ethical and Official Aspects by Alexander Bruce 1899

The Angel-Messiah of Buddhists, Essenes, and Christians by Ernst Bunsen 1880

Calvin's Doctrine of the Trinity by BB Warfield 1909

Christian Doctrine Harmonized and its Rationality Vindicated, Volume 1, by John Kedney 1889

Christian Doctrine Harmonized and its Rationality Vindicated, Volume 2, by John Kedney 1889

Studies in Christian Doctrine by James Drummond 1908

Origin and Development of Nicene Theology, by Hugh M Scott 1896

The Scripture Doctrine of Angels, article in The Popular Science monthly 1877

Creeds or no creeds? (has a section on Christology) by Charles Harris 1922

Theology as an empirical science by D  Macintosh 1919

The Incarnation, article in the Bibliotheca Sacra 1870

The Influence of Greek Ideas and usages upon the Christian church by Edwin Hatch 1914

The Christian Platonists of Alexandria by Charles Biggs 1886

Different New Testament views of Jesus by Joseph Henry Crooker 1891

The Christology of Paul, article in The Monist 1903

The Gospel and its Earliest Interpretations by Orello Cone 1896

Jesus brought back - Meditations on the problems by Joseph Henry Crooker 1889

The LOGOS of Philo and that of ST. John, article in The Methodist Quarterly Review 1858

The Fundamentals- a Testimony to the Truth 1910

The Johannine Theology by G Barker Stevens 1894

The Commentary of Origen on S. John's Gospel - the Text Revised with a Critical Introduction and Indices 1896 Volume 1

The Commentary of Origen on S. John's Gospel - the Text Revised with a Critical Introduction and Indices 1896 Volume 2

A History of the Development of the Doctrine of the Person of the Christ, Volume 1, by DR JA Dorner 1872

A History of the Development of the Doctrine of the Person of the Christ, Volume 2, by DR JA Dorner 1872

A History of the Development of the Doctrine of the Person of the Christ, Volume 3, by DR JA Dorner 1872

The Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews by HL MacNeil 1914

The Life of the Lord Jesus Christ - a Complete Critical Examination of the Origin, Contents, and Connection of the Gospels, Volume 1 by JP Lange 1872

The Life of the Lord Jesus Christ - a Complete Critical Examination of the Origin, Contents, and Connection of the Gospels, Volume 2 by JP Lange 1872

The Life of the Lord Jesus Christ - a Complete Critical Examination of the Origin, Contents, and Connection of the Gospels, Volume 3 by JP Lange 1872

The Life of the Lord Jesus Christ - a Complete Critical Examination of the Origin, Contents, and Connection of the Gospels, Volume 4 by JP Lange 1872

Christian Dogmatics and Notes on the History of Dogma by Conrad Lindberg 1922

The Evolution of the idea of God: an inquiry into the origins of religion By Grant Allen 1897 (discusses the Trinity)

The Ethnic Trinities and their relations to the Christian Trinity by Levi Leonard Paine 1901

The Origin of the doctrine of the Trinity in theb Christian Church, article in The Morning Light 1883
(The attempt to trace the origin of the doctrine of the Trinity to the Jewish Writings is a failure. But when we proceed to the examination of the other probable sources of information upon this subject, viz., the mythology of ancient nations and the Works of Plato and other philosophers, we are rewarded by the discovery of an abundance of evidence. This evidence is thus referred to by Bishop Browne: "In the mythology of all ancient nations, it is plain that the number Three has been a sacred number. The triads of classical mythology {e.g. Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades; or, again, Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva in the Capitol) are well known.)

The Nature and Origin of the Pagan Doctrine of the Trinity or Triads. article in the Southern Presbyterian review 1855

The Trinity Idea, article in The Open Court 1895 (lots of pictures of trinities. "The old Christian Trinities (e. g.. Fig. 14) bear a close resemblance to Hindu representations of the Trimurti.")

A history of the origin of the doctrine of the Trinity by Hugh Stannus 1882 ("the fifth century Christianity had conquered Paganism and Paganism had infected Christianity. The Church was now victorious and corrupt. The rites of the Pantheon had passed into her worship")

Catholic Papers Written by Different Persons 1894

The LOGOS - Exegetical terms, article in The Biblical World 1899

The Sonship of Christ as Taught in Romans 1:3, 4, article in The American Biblical Repository 1888

Dogmatic Theology by William Shedd Volume 1 1889

Dogmatic Theology by William Shedd Volume 2 1889

Dogmatic Theology by William Shedd Volume 3 1889

The Gospel in the Book of Joshua 1870

The Creeds of Athanasius, Sabellius, and Swedenborg, Examined and Compared by Augustus Clissold 1873

An Introduction to Dogmatic Theology by RF Weidner 1895

The Christian faith; a System of Dogmatics, Volume 1, by T Haring 1913

The Christian faith; a System of Dogmatics, Volume 2, by T Haring 1913

A Biblical and Theological Dictionary by Samuel Green 1867

New Testament Theology by W Beyschlag 1895

Modern Thoughts in its Relations to the Person of our Lord Jesus Christ, article in the American Church Review 1872

The Theology of the New Testament by JJ van Oosterzee 1872

The Theology of the New Testament by George Barker Stevens 1910

The Theology of the New Testament by AB Davidson 1907

The Development of Theology in Germany since Kant by Otto Pfleiderer 1890

Athanasianism, article in The New World 1894

H ARCH THS KTISEWS TOU QEOU...Is Christ a Created Being or the Ruler/Source of Creation! by Heinz Schmitz

The Biblical view of Only True God by Heinz Schmitz

On the use of EGW EIMI at John 8:58 by Heinz Schmitz

Acts 20:28: DIA TOU hAIMATOS TOU IDIOU
"blood of his own Son" or "his own blood?" by Heinz Schmitz

On John 20:28 by Heinz Schmitz

John 1:3, 4, Punctuation, Staircase Parallelism and Caris by Heinz Schmitz

and the Word was LIKE God, by Heinz Schmitz

On Mark 10:18 by Heinz Schmitz

An Examination of Colossians 1:15-20: “Firstborn”; “Other”: What is the correct understanding? by Heinz Schmitz

Jesus: God's Wisdom, by Heinz Schmitz

Criticism on the Theological Idea of Deity - Contrasting the views Entertained of a Supreme Being by the Ancient Greeks with those of the Hebrew Writers by MB Craven 1871

Biblical Notes and Dissertations Chiefly intended to confirm and illustrate the doctrine of the Deity of Christ; with some remarks on the practical importance of that doctrine by Joseph John Gurney 1833

Antitrinitarian Biography - Sketches of the lives and writings of distinguished antitrinitarians, exhibiting a view of the state of the Unitarian doctrine and worship in the principal nations of Europe, from the reformation to the close of the seventeenth century, to which is prefixed a history of Unitarianism in England during the same period, Volume 1 by Robert Wallace 1850

Antitrinitarian Biography - Sketches of the lives and writings of distinguished antitrinitarians, exhibiting a view of the state of the Unitarian doctrine and worship in the principal nations of Europe, from the reformation to the close of the seventeenth century, to which is prefixed a history of Unitarianism in England during the same period, Volume 2 by Robert Wallace 1850

Antitrinitarian Biography - Sketches of the lives and writings of distinguished antitrinitarians, exhibiting a view of the state of the Unitarian doctrine and worship in the principal nations of Europe, from the reformation to the close of the seventeenth century, to which is prefixed a history of Unitarianism in England during the same period, Volume 3 by Robert Wallace 1850

The Christ of God - The Rationale of the Deity of Christ by Charles Mann 1897

Letters on the Trinity and on the divinity of Christ by Moses Stuart 1829

Testimonies of the Ante-Nicene Fathers to the Divinity of Christ by Edward Burton 1829

One God in One Person Only And Jesus Christ a Being Distinct from God by John Sherman 1805

A Treatise on the Character of Jesus by Ethan Smith - 1814

Napoleon's argument for the divinity of Christ and the Scriptures 1861

The Mustard Tree -an argument on behalf of the divinity of Christ by O.R. Vassall-Phillips 1912

A Manual of the History of Dogmas, Volume 1 by Bernard John Otten - 1922

A Manual of the History of Dogmas, Volume 2 by Bernard John Otten - 1922

Doctrine and Development by Hastings Rashdall 1898

The Normative use of Scripture by Typical Theologians of Protestant Orthodoxy in Great Britain and America by Charles M Sharpe 1912

Essays in Fallacy (The fallacy in theology) by Sir Andrew MacPhail 1910 ("Paul never went so far as to elevate Jesus to an equality with God. The utmost he conceded was that he was higher than the angels. It was left for the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews to force into Christianity the Alexandrine conception that the world was created by the Son of God. That made it easy for the writer of the Fourth Gospel to declare in his prologue, 'In the beginning was the logos, and the logos was with God, and the logos was a god.'"

The Dawn of Christianity By Alfred Wilhelm Martin 1914 ("'In the beginning was the Logos and the Logos was a God,' and it 'became flesh' in order that 'God whom no man had seen at any time might be made manifest.' Not only does the Fourth Gospel root itself in a Greek idea, but it also unfolds with all the stateliness, dignity and order of a Greek tragedy."

Apologia by Edwin Abbott 1907 ("Notice how the evangelist — when he has begun his gospel by asserting the eternal pre-existence of the Logos ['In the beginning was the Logos'] — does not go on to say, as a Tritheist might do, 'and the Logos was [a] God.' No, he places first the statement 'The Logos was with God.'")

Unitarianism Philosophically and Theologically Examined, Volume 1 by Anthony Kohlmann 1832

Unitarianism Philosophically and Theologically Examined, Volume 2 by Anthony Kohlmann 1832

Unitarianism the Doctrine of the Gospel, A View of the Scriptural Grounds of Unitarianism with an Examination of all the Expressions in the New Testament which are Generally Considered as Supporting Opposite Doctrines by Lant Carpenter 1823

The Book of Churches and Sects by Thomas Charles Boone 1826 (has a section on John 1:1)

The Reading _Only-Begotten God_, article in the Theological Review 1871

On The Reading _Only-Begotten God_ John 1:18, article in the Modern Review 1883

The Doctrine of the Greek Article by Thomas Middleton 1833

Remarks on the uses of the Definitive Article, Containing Proofs of the Divinity of Christ by Granville Sharp 1803

Tertullian and the Doctrine of the Trinity, article in The Princeton Theological Review 1905

The Life of Jesus Critically Examined, Volume 1 by David Friedrich Strauss - 1892

The Life of Jesus Critically Examined, Volume 2 by David Friedrich Strauss - 1892

Join my Facebook Groupgdixierose