A. John 1:1c
The late Dr. Julius Mantey, noted NT Greek scholar and strong trinitarian, allegedly wrote a powerful attack against the accuracy and honesty of the NWT. We will look at a point raised concerning the NWT in a July 11, 1974 letter to the Watchtower Society attributed to Mantey (when he was 84!) which anti-Watchtower writers are fond of reproducing and quoting.
John 1:1
His first concern was with John 1:1. His complaint that the WT Society dishonestly used his book to support their translation is incredible! It’s undoubtedly true that he didn’t intend anything in his book to support a non-trinitarian interpretation of John 1:1. (The Watchtower Society never claimed he did.) But the fact is that Mantey's own translation found in his Grammar does support it nevertheless! The quote by the Society refers to an example used by Mantey in his book which is grammatically identical to John 1:1 (articular subject after the copulative verb and anarthrous predicate noun before the copulative verb) and which Mantey has translated as, “and the place was a market" - p. 148, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, Macmillan Publishing Co., 1957 ed. - an exact parallel to the NWT’s “and the Word was a god.” - see NWT 25-28.
We can see the very same thing happening with all such parallel examples found in John's writings. The most important exception would be with anarthrous predicate nouns which are modified by prepositions or genitives.
Here are a number of respected trinitarian scholars writing about the use and non-use of the definite article with "prepositional" and genitive-modified anarthrous nouns:
+++ As Dana and Mantey tell us, “The use of prepositions, possessive ... pronouns, and the genitive case also tend to make a word definite. At such times, even if the article is not used, the object is already distinctly indicated.” - p. 137, D&M Grammar.
+++ In section VIII, ‘The Absence of the Article,’ Professor A. T. Robertson quotes Gildersleeve and tells us, “prepositional phrases and other formulae may dispense with the article” - p. 790. And “(b) with GENITIVES. We have seen that the substantive MAY still be definite if anarthrous, though not necessarily so. Cf. pulai hadou (Matt. 16:18), anastasis nekron (Acts 23:6), [etc.]” - p. 791, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament .
And, this highly respected trinitarian New Testament Greek authority also tells us:
“In examples like this [“prepositional” constructions] (cf. ... Mt. 27:54) ONLY THE CONTEXT CAN DECIDE [whether the anarthrous noun is definite or indefinite]. Sometimes the matter is wholly doubtful.... [Please note that the example Robertson has given (Matt. 27:54) has the anarthrous predicate noun coming before the verb as in Colwell’s Rule!] In Jo. 5:27 [‘son of man’] may be either ‘the son of man’ or ‘a son of man.’” - p. 781. [Robertson says this in spite of the fact that John 5:27 also has an anarthrous predicate noun preceding its verb!! It’s “prepositional” (noun modified by a genitive noun in these cases) and, therefore, the use/non-use of the article is ambiguous!] - A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, A. T. Robertson, 1934.
+++ C. F. D. Moule says: “9. Finally, note that the use or non-use of the article may, in some cases, be due to the influence of Semitic idiom rather than deliberate desire to modify the sense. A noun in the construct case [similar to a noun modified by a genitive noun in NT Greek, e.g., ‘man of God’] in Hebrew is never allowed to carry the article, and this may sometimes be sufficient to explain an anarthrous noun in a Greek equivalent phrase: aggelos kuriou might be a Hebraism for the angel of the Lord; so doxa kuriou.” – p. 117, An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek, Cambridge University Press, 1990 printing.
+++ J. H. Moulton tells us: “the matter [of identifying an anarthrous ‘spirit’] is complicated threefold by the question of the non-use of the art[icle] with proper nouns, and in prepositional expressions ..., and even (in Biblical Greek through influence of the Heb. construct state) before a genitive. In none of these situations need the lack of the art[icle] indicate any indefiniteness of reference” - p. 175. And, “(d) Absence of Article before a noun which governs a genitive. In Heb. a noun may be in the construct state or have a suffix attached to it, and in either case it would be anarthrous. This influenced the LXX [Septuagint] and, in turn, the NT writers in varying degrees. Thus aggelos kuriou is not ‘an angel’ but the angel’, doxa laou is ‘the glory’.” - pp. 179-180, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, vol. III, J. H. Moulton, 1963.
+++ “The article … is sometimes missing, especially after prepositions … and with a genitive which depends on an anarthrous noun (especially a predicate noun): Mt 27:43.” - Blass & Debrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, p. 133, University of Chicago Press, 1961.
+++ - "A genitive qualifier tends to make the head noun definite even though it might not have the article." - Dr. Richard A. Young, Intermediate New Testament Greek, p. 67, Broadman and Holman Publ., 1994.
+++ Henry Alford wrote concerning Titus 2:13 in his The Greek Testament, “It [‘saviour’] is joined with [hmwn, ‘of us’ (genitive)], which is an additional reason why it may spare the article: see Luke 1:78; Ro. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3” - p. 420, The Greek Testament, by Henry Alford.
+++ “….(2) definiteness is not expressed only by the article but may [not always] also be indicated by an accompanying genitive or possessive pronoun; …(4) Biblical Greek sometimes reflects the Semitic idiom in which the noun in the construct state [comparable to ‘angel of Lord’], even if definite, is anarthrous … and (5) there is a tendency for nouns to be anarthrous that are used in familiar or stereotyped expressions that may date from the prearticular age of Greek - expressions such as idiomatic prepositional phrases.” - p. 304, Jesus as God, Murray J. Harris, Baker Book House, 1992. (Emphasis added)
+++ “#1146. A substantive followed by an attributive genitive and forming with it a compound idea, usually omits the article.” - H. W. Smyth’s A Greek Grammar for Colleges, p. 291.
+++ Also see pp. 150-151 in Dr. G.B. Winer's A Treatise on the Grammar of New Testament Greek.
Since John 1:1c does not have its predicate noun with a “prepositional” construction anyway, it is necessarily a part of proper research to select parallel examples (i.e., without “prepositional” constructions) in any attempt to show a similar effect as claimed for John 1:1c.
) I would have to say that "a god" is probably not even possible as a translation. 