This review will cover John 1:1-2. Dr. Heiser defends the traditional Trinitarian interpretation (“and the Word was God”) against the NWT (“and the Word was a god”). Dr. Heiser falsely charges JW’s of teaching that the absence of the article in Greek before the word “God” means Jesus is “a god.” After his misrepresentation, he claims that this passage teaches that Jesus is fully God without providing any basis for why the Apostle John made inspired distinctions between the Father (“the God) and the Son (“[no article] God.” Let’s unpack this further. Some Christians continue to falsely charge JW’s of teaching that the translation “a god” should be used in the New Testament every time there is no article before the word “God” in the Greek. Dr. Heiser states, “What if we used their own criterion, their own litmus test (wherever “God” lacks a definite article, we should translate it “a god”)? What if we did that through the rest of John 1 and the rest of the nt? What kind of readings would that produce?” The problem is that the Watchtower Society has never made such a claim. All one has to do is examine their translation (NWT) and it becomes evident that this charge is fallacious. Just because the unbiblical, authoritative Watchtower Society has made past failed prophecies and continues to promote some unbiblical doctrines is no justification for leveling this false charge. Because Dr. Heiser omitted the controversy surrounding the translation of John 1:1c, a brief summary follows: John 1:1 contains three clauses. The controversy is over how to correctly translate the third clause (“and the Word was [?]”). The second clause reads, “and the Word was with God” (ESV). Because the Word (Jesus) was with God (“and the Word was with God”), Jesus cannot be the same God He was with without the heresy of Modalism. Who is the God that Jesus (Word) is with? The Trinity has three choices. Jesus is undisputed with His Father (“God”). So Jesus is not the same God He was with (John 1:18). The second clause in the Greek translates, “and the Word was with THE God.” It includes the definite article “ton” before the word “God” (omitted in English translations). John made a second inspired distinction between Jesus (Word) and His Father (“the God). He placed a direct article before the Word “God” in the second clause for the Father and omitted this article in the third clause for Jesus (“and the Word [Jesus] was [no article] God. This leaves no doubt that Jesus is not the same God He was with. Yet Trinitarian translations pretend that John also used a direct article for Jesus and make Him the same God He was with (“and the Word [Jesus] was God [the Father]”). Trinitarian translations teach Modalism and don’t reflect the underlying Greek. A literal translation that transmits the inspired distinctions that the Apostle John made is to translate the third clause, “and the word was a god.” Since the Father who is greater (John 10:29, 14:28; Romans 6:10, 1 Corinthians 3:23, 11:3, 15:24-28, Ephesians 4:6) is sometimes called “a God” in the Old Testament (Exodus 34:6, Deuteronomy 32:4, 1 Samuel 2:3, Nehemiah 9:17, Psalm 7:11, 68:20, etc.), it is not out of place for Jesus to be called “a god” in the context. Other Bibles had this translation before the JW’s came into existence (For example, see the 2-3rd century Coptic Gospel of John). A correct understanding of the first verse of John sets the tone for the entire Gospel.