'A God' = Polytheism
The NWT renders John 1:1c as 'the Word was a god' — Jesus is divine but not Almighty God.
The NWT's 'a god' creates an inescapable trilemma. If Jesus is 'a god,' he is either (1) a true god — which is polytheism, violating the first commandment (), the Shema (), and ; (2) a false god — which means Christians should reject him entirely; or (3) the one true God — which is the Trinitarian position. Reinforce with : 'Is there any God but me? There is no other Rock; I know not one.' The first commandment doesn't say 'no other almighty gods' — it says 'no other gods.' Full stop. The Watchtower's translation painted itself into a corner.
The NWT's own rendering forces JWs to break the first commandment. If no other gods exist (, 44:8), Jesus cannot be 'a god.' He is either a false god or he is Jehovah.
The Word was 'with' God — that means he's separate from God, not God himself.
The Greek preposition is pros (toward, face-to-face), not meta (alongside) or sun (together with). Pros with the accusative implies active, intimate, face-to-face relationship — an eternal personal communion within the Godhead. The Word is both distinct from God the Father AND in the closest possible relationship with him. That's exactly what the Trinity teaches: distinct persons, one God.
Truth in Translation by Jason BeDuhn supports the NWT.
BeDuhn identifies problems with every translation. Compare the NWT to any Greek interlinear yourself. says ALL things were made through Jesus — if he made everything, he himself could not have been made.
The Bible calls other beings 'gods' — judges in Psalm 82, Satan in 2 Corinthians 4:4 — so 'a god' doesn't mean polytheism.
Psalm 82 calls unjust rulers 'gods' as a condemnation — God judges them for injustice and says 'you will die like men.' Satan is 'the god of this age' by usurpation, not by nature. Neither is a compliment. But calls the Word 'a god' as a positive, ontological statement about his nature from eternity. If that's a genuine claim, it introduces a second true god — polytheism. If it's not genuine, Jesus is a false god. Either way, the first commandment is broken.
John 1:2 says he was in the beginning with God — that means he was already created with God, and then verse 3 lists what was created after.
The verse rules that reading out. "In the beginning was the Word" (verse 1) — was, not came to be. The Greek verb is en (imperfect of eimi, the verb of continuous being), not egeneto (the verb of coming into existence) which appears for everything else in verse 3. John deliberately switches verbs at verse 3: everything that came into existence (egeneto) came into existence through the Word. The Word himself is described in verses 1-2 with en — continuous existence, no beginning. If the Word had been "already created with God," John would have used the egeneto verb in verses 1-2 the way he does in verse 3. He doesn't — because the Word is not one of the created things. Verse 2 doesn't say "after he was created he was with God"; it says "this one (continuously) was in the beginning with God." Then verse 3 says all coming-into-being things came into being through him.
We don't worship Jesus — we only worship Jehovah. So there's no polytheism.
The first commandment doesn't say 'you must not worship other gods.' It says 'you must not have any other gods.' Having a god you don't worship is still having another god. And says God commands the angels to worship Jesus — your own older NWT (1961) translated proskyneo as 'worship' at before changing it to 'do obeisance.'
The reason John 1:1 says 'a god' is the Greek grammar — when theos has the article (ho theos), it means the true God Jehovah. When it doesn't, it just means 'a god.'
Take the Watchtower's own rule and apply it consistently. The cleanest case is , which even the NWT preserves: Thomas says to Jesus "my Lord and my God." In Greek that is "ho kyrios mou kai ho theos mou" — ho theos, with the article, addressed directly to Jesus. By the Watchtower's own rule, Thomas just called Jesus Jehovah. And it's not a one-off — the same articular ho theos is applied to Jesus in , , and . The NWT translates each of those passages away from the Son (rendering "God is your throne" instead of "Your throne, O God"; punctuating so the doxology lands on the Father; reading as two persons rather than one) — but the NWT's own Kingdom Interlinear Translation prints the Greek directly under the English, and the Greek has ho theos in every case. So either the Watchtower's grammar rule is wrong, or the same rule applied consistently identifies Jesus as Jehovah in at least four New Testament passages. Which horn do you take?
Don't get lost in Greek grammar debates. Keep it simple: one God or two?
Don't mock the NWT — ask questions that let the contradiction speak for itself.
Ask them to read , , and together in their own NWT, then ask how Jesus can be 'a god' if no other gods exist.