Sbt’s Page on-The Colwell Rule on Jn 1:1-Many Bible Publishers Translated- a-god or a-God---Long Before Colwell’s Birth--Study

John-1-1.-GOD -J-or-Y Open and Study JOHN1onePLUS.htm--BestBiblesComingInTheFUTURE.htm-open B2.S Bibles or Best-n-T-OnenessBibles.htm

Sbt The Alternative to Mysticism The Expository Library 20.htm 2008-Sbt open (No.1. ) Reference RESEARCH Expository Library+

This article has been tagged for you here and (at the end) with the initials defined/W/BBD (SP*open the no. 1)

Detailed with SBT Links for comparison


Colwell's Rule and John 1:1 by William Arnold III

A Greek scholar  named E. C. Colwell discovered a rule which applied to certain uses of the Greek article (in English this is the word “the”). His rule stated that “definite predicate nouns which precede the verb usually lack the article.”1 The word theos (God) in John 1:1c is a predicate noun and it is anarthrous (it lacks the article). The question I would like to address is: “How does this rule apply to John 1:1 and how does this relate to a Oneness perspective of this passage?” For The Answer open  8.htm   Plus  Oneness. defined htm and -7.htm

In the past, Trinitarians have argued that Colwell’s rule proves that the anarthrous theos in John 1:1c (the Word was God) must be taken as definite. They have done so to combat Arianism and modern day Jehovah’s Witnesses. The New World Translation, the official Bible of Jehovah’s Witnesses, translates John 1:1c as “the Word was a god.” (Many Bible Publishers Exposed in SBT’S John1-1.htm)-Aa.htm defined .

So we can see why Trinitarian scholars would object to such a translation and instead argue for a definite theos, thus proving the deity of Christ in this passage. However, as Daniel Wallace has pointed out, simply appealing to Colwell’s rule alone does not prove that theos must be taken as definite.2 His rule would only say that if theos is definite then it would probably lack the article (and it does). But the reverse is not necessarily true. Simply lacking the article in this construction does not make the noun definite.

Wallace goes on to argue that theos should not be taken as definite but instead as qualitative, thus emphasizing “the nature of the Word, rather than his identity.” The glosses which he suggests bring out this idea are, “What God was, the Word was” (NEB), or “the Word was divine” (a modified Moffatt translation).3 He also states that a definite theos in this passage would imply Sabellianism or Modalism (making Jesus to be God the Father, i.e., a Oneness perspective). In a footnote he quotes several other Greek scholars which concur, some even more emphatically (Westcott, A. T. Robertson, Lange, Chemnitz, Alford and even Martin Luther).4

My question to all of these grammarians is this: “Why does a definite theos have to refer to God the Father, since all three persons are co-equal in Trinitarian theology?” The Holy Spirit is identified as “God” with the article present in Acts 5:3-4. Jesus is identified as “God” with the article present in John 20:28, Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1. Wallace acknowledges these passages, but states that (in John 20:28)-John-20-28.htm defined-- “there is nothing in that context that would identify [Jesus] with the Father.”5 But if God is a Trinity, I see nothing in John 1:1b (“the Word was with God”) that would require that this occurrence of theos be identified as God the Father either.6 It simply says that “the Word was with God (article present).” Why could this not be referring to God the Holy Spirit? Surely if God is an eternal Trinity then Jesus would have been with him (God the Holy Spirit) in the beginning as well.

The point we should note here is that when a Trinitarian reads the word “God,” he (rightly) assumes that it refers to God the Father, unless there is reason to believe otherwise. Somehow, the Father is more ‘God’ than the other two people. So if a definite theos in this passage would make Jesus God the Father (as Wallace and the other grammarians above have stated) then I see no reason why a definite theos applied to Jesus anywhere else in the New Testament would not also make Jesus God the Father! (such as in the passages noted above).

So what other options were open to John? Answer (GOD defined/W/BBD* 1 )

He could have easily left theos anarthrous and still put it after the verb, thus retaining the qualitative sense that Wallace argues for. So it was not necessary to place it before the verb merely for that reason. The fact that he chose to put it before the verb and to the beginning of the phrase would seem to indicate emphasis (The Word was God!). As mentioned before, Colwell’s rule states that “definite predicate nouns which precede the verb usually lack the article.”7 So if John intended a definite theos and wanted to emphasize the word “God,” then he would have said it exactly how he did! Now, I am in agreement with Wallace, that Colwell’s rule does not prove a definite theos, but it most definitely supports it. Even he admits that a definite theos is “certainly possible grammatically.”8

Furthermore, you could only derive a Trinitarian interpretation from John 1:1 (GOD defined/W/BBD* 1 ) if you come to this passage with an already developed Trinitarian theology. If you approached it with a strict Monotheism (which is what I believe John held to) then this passage would definitely support such a view. If John had wanted to emphasize the word theos then he would have moved it to the beginning of the phrase before the verb and thus, (according to Colwell’s rule) it would be anarthrous (as it is).


1.      E. C. Colwell, A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament, p. 20, quoted in Wallace, GGBB, 257. <back>
2. Daniel Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 269. <back>
3. Wallace, 269. He does not however suggest that these glosses should actually be used in a translation since they can be misleading. <back>
4. Wallace, 268. <back>
5. Wallace, 268. <back>
6. Which is how a Trinitarian reads this passage - ". . . the Word was WITH God the Father, and the Word WAS God the Son" (emphasis added). <back>
7. Colwell, A Definite Rule, quoted in Wallace, GGBB, 257. <back>
8. Wallace, 268. He still argues against it for reasons of frequency and theology, p. 269. <back>

Email IBS | Statement of Faith | Home | Browse by Author | Q & A
Links | Virtual Classroom | Copyright | Submitting Articles | Search

SBT--Oneness-Noun1. The quality of being united into one.--

being united---Man united God---Can You Imagine That ?–Study -Homoousion.htm-- 8.htm

Where Were the Nicene Council Members When God Was Creating Things? Studyopen Where.htm


Who Wrote the Greek Bible Grammatical Rules?-Consider the Source - 7.htm

Is Oneness In the Bible- 8.htm-- According to the (Oneness-dualism-Triune-Doctrines ) Jesus disappear into the clouds and went into a non existing nothingness--- And went back to -being the  2nd Phantom Spirit being person of the Trinity?.—or just being God United With God.—Right---yea Right? 8.htm--Colwell’s   BestBiblesComingInTheFUTURE.htm-

Commentary on false wonders,

Man --With Most likely Satan’s Influence CREATED The False--Images of the So-Called GodHead.

GodHead defined

Study  AAIsJesusRealToYOU.htm. With Verse 9 activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders, Compare KJV/w/Strong’s N0’s 2Th 2:9

TrinityDelusion2Thess8-12.htm a Delusion of Oneness.htm


                                                                                Trindirty.htm and 8.htm

So what does I really mean to the Oneness –Dualism- Triune –Doctrine(s) Believers  

Rev 22:12

"Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me,

 to render to every man according to what he has done *. (DenyingJesusLife.htm defined


Study  9.htm and 10.htm-13.htm 010.htm


/Oneness.htm defined with (DenyingJesusLife.htm defined


Man united God---Can You Imagine That ?–Study -Homoousion.htm-- 8.htm-aLso-COMPARE ManCreatedGod.htm

Jn 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (GOD defined/W/BBD* 1 )

En arxh| hn (5713) o logov,


 defined/W/BBD (SP*open 1)

Many Bible Publishers Exposed SBT’S open  John1-1.htm)

This article has been tagged for you with  defined/W/BBD (SP*open the no. 1)

Best Examples are in open*** Introduction-For-Concerned-Students.htm***

For More About Us—Open ABOUTUS.htm and Preface.htm.

Colwell’s   BestBiblesComingInTheFUTURE.htm-


                                                 The Bottom Line Is


All or Most all Trinitarian/Oneness Scholars –Teachers and Common Believers admit that these Creeds are Mystical

And incomprehensible--And they choose to think that’s OK—because that is what they have been taught.


The truth is the Holy Verses are adequate and Simple--

When taught by teachers that know how to do so..--

There are hundreds of articles with hundreds of printed pages on The Trinitarian/Oneness Binitarian Movement of 325+


all because they dispute the **** Simple ***Order of things that the God of Jesus has explained

                                                                 Through His Holy Words.


That Jesus was Created First—The Best Article the Expository Library has found is in FirstBorn.htm


Sbt –Dislikes

Using the words Lies or Liar but the Nicene Creeds actually makes Jesus out

To be a Liar.


They Insist That if God Created His Son To As Real As All God’s Other Earthly And Heavenly Sons Are YOU

Spreading Arianism


 all because they dispute the **** Simple ***Order of things that the God of Jesus has explained

                                                                 Through His Holy Words.

That Jesus was Created First—The Best Article the Expository Library has found is in FirstBorn.htm


Part One: Early Arian History


[part two]

[history page]



The Encyclopedia of Religion notes: "Human life is characterized by the need to distinguish between what is real and unreal, powerful and powerless, genuine and deceptive, pure and contaminated, clear and confused, as well as relative degrees of one extreme or the other

You have real Life because Jesus’ Father and God caused it. Is Jesus as real as you are?. Does Jesus have life in himself as He himself Stated or do the Nicene Creed Makers know more about Jesus then He did of Himself?


What is Valid inOpen*GOD defined*With Most Bible Publisher’s Theology-of GOD.-Theology.htm


Sbt –Dislikes

Using the words Lies or Liar but the Nicene Creeds actually makes Jesus out

To be a Liar. Study   BiblePublishersAccountableToWho.htm



see full article in Bottom Line in CommentaryNote.htm


Man united God with God, Can You Imagine!!! That--8.htm-aLso-COMPARE-- ManCreatedGod.htm

What goes around comes around Source.htm



  First Letter Search

or Index2.htm or Index 1


                                 A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P Q  R  S T U V  W  X Y  Z


Sbt Does Not Get Into Criticisms of Individuals or Groups or organizations. Unscriptural Traditions –Is the Main Concern

Quoting Christ is not Criticisms—it is a Christian’s Duty--Study Ephesians 6:10-18 -Open [Verse 12 in Original Greek]  

The Library Advocates that each person thoroughly examine their Churches

Statement of Faith or Beliefs and agree with it before becoming a member

Compare STATEMENTsAboutManyChurchesBeliefsUpdated.htm


–SO HELP US ALL Y.eH.oW.aH  in English Jehovah   


SBT1-The TETRAGRAMMATON.htm Testifier----BiblePublishersAccountableToWho.htm


Is God’s Name Christ?-The Church of Christ? or The Church of God

What Do Commentaries.htm Say About Acts 15:14


Acts 15:14  

 WEY: Symeon has related how God first looked graciously on the Gentiles
to take from among them a People to be called by His name. ...
Acts 15:14 Parallel 11Translations

Is God’s Name Christ?--The Church of Christ? or The Church of God?—Open and Study



If You go to a Congregation that Teaches all the Above ---You can feel Safe and not Sorry about that--

 SBT is only a Reference Library—Not The Salvation Congregation !! Read! Heb10-23-26.htm

ABOUTUS.htm--- The Expository Library index.htm


Sbt gives you access to both Types of Theologies of GOD-Plus Others are Godhead Believers.


                                                                                   To E-Mail SBT Read

 Is it True That Trinitarians and Oneness Bible Teachers Don’t Believe Jesus is Real?

Survey For all Independently Named Christain Churches- Do you believe Jesus is Real?

Trinitarians--Please Write in with the Scriptures (Supporting Holy-Verses) that proves that Jesus is real to you!

         Write—Dear Sbt Librarian –open- -Review-2Tim3-16-17.htm & Jn 17:3

For Main List Open PlusOthers.htm- For the definition of Faith and Church Open Faith-Explained.htm


                                                                                    To E-Mail SBT Read


0A4-SBT Has a Special Invitation for Readers to participate in Search & Research to add to the Expository Library Luke 8-17

You will get a response in about 3 days time. Below are many references. After reading all the references below + index page and if you

Sincerely believe SBT has missed something and needs to add something more please-E-Mail to Dear

Definition of Search-1 to go or look through carefully in order to find something missing or lost:-Open Search for more definitions.

Definition of Research-1 diligent and systematic inquiry or investigation into a subject in order to discover or revise facts, theories,

applications-etc-Open Research for more definitions. BiblicalLOGISTICS.htm open 0A4.htm