Unorthodox TheologyA forum to discuss/debate theological doctrines not accepted by mainstream evangelical Christianity (eg. Full Preterism, Unitarianism)
The following is a real term translation, and then it is followed by a true translation of what John was really expressing.
John 20:27-28(a real term translation in bold) 27 Then he (Messiah Y'Shua) said to Thomas, "Reach here your finger, and see my hands. Reach here your hand, and put it into my side. Don't be faithless, but believing."
28 Thomas answered him, "My Kurios and my Theos!"
John 20:27-28(The True "Implied" Translation in bold)
27 Then he (Messiah Y'Shua) said to Thomas, "Reach here your finger, and see my hands. Reach here your hand, and put it into my side. Don't be faithless, but believing."
28 Thomas answered him, "My Supreme Master and My Supreme Godly Leader!"
According to Strong's Concordance (which isn't purely without prejudice) the following are the definitions of Kurios, and Theos.
KURIOS, Strong's #2962: He who is "In Charge" or "In Authority." The Supreme Authority (for a specific realm of influence).
THEOS, Strong's #2316: As a figure of speech, "A Magistrate" or a "Supreme Divinity." OR "godly" (like G-d) (Image of G-d) OR even G-d (G-d is listed only because G-d has G-dly qualities, is Divine, and is also Supreme, but G-d is not the only one with those qualities). Strong's Concordance only lists G-d as a last choice, because anyone that has received G-d's Holy Spirit or Righteous Character has G-dly qualities; and The Messiah certainly has G-dly qualities. As a matter of fact all of YHVH's "Chosen Few" (Elohyim or Godly Children) can be referred to as a Theos.
Note: The Eternal "Self Existent" GOD (YHVH or YHVH) can only be implied with 100% certainty when both Kurios and Theos are placed side by side as in "KURIOS THEOS." The conjunction 'and'(between Kurios 'and' Theos) is not sufficient enough to replace "KURIOS THEOS." This "Side by Side" form of "KURIOS THEOS" is used exclusively in the 'New Testament' (The Epistles) to positively indicate onlyYHVH, and not His First Appointed Son, Messiah Y'Shua. While Messiah is both a Kurios, 'and' also a Theos, he is not a "KURIOS THEOS." There are zero examples of the Messiah ever being referred to as "KURIOS THEOS" anywhere in the Bible. The following New Testament verses are positive indicators where "KURIOS THEOS" has been used in the Epistles to exclusively indicate YHVH: Luke 1:32, 1:68; 1 Peter 3:15,Revelation 4:8, 11:17, 15:3, 16:7, 18:8, 19:6, 21:22, 22:5, and 22:6. However, when you see "Lord YHVH" or Lord god" in English, this does not necessarily indicate "KURIOS THEOS," as is shown in Jude 1:4. Jude 1:4 says "Lord god," meaning a lesser title than "LORD GOD."
__________________ "Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." Romans 8:37-39
Some have claimed that the expression “ho theos” used by Thomas in John 20:28 shows that Thomas was calling Jesus the Supreme Being, since “theos” with the definite article usually refers to the only true God.
Actually, the article before THEOS in John 20:28 is used because of the possessive nature of the phrase, literally translated “the god of me”. This kind of possessive usually needs the article. It is the same usage as that used in the phrase used of Satan, “the god of this world”, in 2 Corinthians 4:4. Thus, if the usage in John 20:28 means that Jesus is God Almighty, then one should also reason that Satan is God Almighty.
However, when one person is being referred to, the Greek usually only requires one article, even if two titles are used connected by kai (and). We find an example of this just a few verses before, where two titles are used of the God and Father of Jesus, connected by “kai”: John 20:17
legei autee ieesous mee mou haptou oupw gar
IS SAYING TO HER JESUS NOT OF ME BE TOUCHING, NOT YET FOR
anabebeeka pros ton patera poreuou de pros
I HAVE ASCENDED TOWARD THE FATHER; BE GOING BUT TOWARD
tous adelphous mou kai eipe autois anabainw
THE BROTHERS OF ME AND SAY TO THEM I AM ASCENDING
pros ton patera mou kai patera humwn kai theon
TOWARD THE FATHER OF ME AND FATHER OF YOU AND GOD
mou kai theon humwn
OF ME AND GOD OF YOU.
Notice the whole phrase “the father of me and father of you and God of me of God of you” has only one article for the whole possessive phrase.
__________________ "Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." Romans 8:37-39
The following is a real term translation, and then it is followed by a true translation of what John was really expressing.
John 20:27-28(a real term translation in bold)
27 Then he (Messiah Y'Shua) said to Thomas, "Reach here your finger, and see my hands. Reach here your hand, and put it into my side. Don't be faithless, but believing." 28 Thomas answered him, "My Kurios and my Theos!"
John 20:27-28(The True "Implied" Translation in bold) 27 Then he (Messiah Y'Shua) said to Thomas, "Reach here your finger, and see my hands. Reach here your hand, and put it into my side. Don't be faithless, but believing." 28 Thomas answered him, "My Supreme Master and My Supreme Godly Leader!"
According to Strong's Concordance (which isn't purely without prejudice) the following are the definitions of Kurios, and Theos.
KURIOS, Strong's #2962: He who is "In Charge" or "In Authority." The Supreme Authority (for a specific realm of influence).
THEOS, Strong's #2316: As a figure of speech, "A Magistrate" or a "Supreme Divinity." OR "godly" (like G-d) (Image of G-d) OR even G-d (G-d is listed only because G-d has G-dly qualities, is Divine, and is also Supreme, but G-d is not the only one with those qualities). Strong's Concordance only lists G-d as a last choice, because anyone that has received G-d's Holy Spirit or Righteous Character has G-dly qualities; and The Messiah certainly has G-dly qualities. As a matter of fact all of YHVH's "Chosen Few" (Elohyim or Godly Children) can be referred to as a Theos.
Note: The Eternal "Self Existent" GOD (YHVH or YHVH) can only be implied with 100% certainty when both Kurios and Theos are placed side by side as in "KURIOS THEOS." The conjunction 'and'(between Kurios 'and' Theos) is not sufficient enough to replace "KURIOS THEOS." This "Side by Side" form of "KURIOS THEOS" is used exclusively in the 'New Testament' (The Epistles) to positively indicate onlyYHVH, and not His First Appointed Son, Messiah Y'Shua. While Messiah is both a Kurios, 'and' also a Theos, he is not a "KURIOS THEOS."
There are zero examples of the Messiah ever being referred to as "KURIOS THEOS" anywhere in the Bible. The following New Testament verses are positive indicators where "KURIOS THEOS" has been used in the Epistles to exclusively indicate YHVH: Luke 1:32, 1:68; 1 Peter 3:15,Revelation 4:8, 11:17, 15:3, 16:7, 18:8, 19:6, 21:22, 22:5, and 22:6. However, when you see "Lord YHVH" or Lord god" in English, this does not necessarily indicate "KURIOS THEOS," as is shown in Jude 1:4. Jude 1:4 says "Lord god," meaning a lesser title than "LORD GOD."
but in scripture Jesus is always adressed as Kurie, which is vocative. kurios is always used to talk about someone who is lord. And Kurios is the Greek word for lord in john 20.28 so when Thomas was talking to Jesus he was talking about the lord and god to Jesus. So he wasn't calling Jesus my lord and my god, he was talking to Jesus about his lord and god.
Matthew 18:27 And out of pity for him the lord (kurios) of that servant released him and forgave him the debt. or
Matthew 21:4040 When therefore the owner (kurios) of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?”
Here , in the above quotes,Jesus is talking about a Lord, not talking to a lord.
but here, in matthew 7.21 below, Jesus is being addressed as Lord and the Greek word is Kurie not kurios. it's that way throughout the bible.
Mathew 7.21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ (kurie, kurie) will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.
__________________ God is a spirit (jn 4:24)........... God is not a man...(Nu 23:19) A spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me (Jesus) have (Lu 24:39).....the man Christ Jesus 1 ti 2:5
Last edited by 2ducklow; 12th October 2009 at 09:14 AM.
the answer to your questions is found in my post #8.
No it isn't. What you posted is 1) completely out of context 2) Nothing but speculation 3) twisting scriptures to fit (eisegesis).
Let me remind you that verses 24-30 refer to only Jesus not the Father. As a matter of fact, it is ludicrous to believe that Kurios refers to the Father in verse 28 when the same Kurios in verse 25 is obviously referring to Jesus. No one has seen the Father so how can the disciples be referring to the Father? Absurd.
Context, context. It is important.
__________________ “You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot by men. “You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.- Our Lord and Savior.
No it isn't. What you posted is 1) completely out of context 2) Nothing but speculation 3) twisting scriptures to fit (eisegesis).[
Let me remind you that verses 24-30 refer to only Jesus not the Father. As a matter of fact, it is ludicrous to believe that Kurios refers to the Father in verse 28 when the same Kurios in verse 25 is obviously referring to Jesus. No one has seen the Father so how can the disciples be referring to the Father? Absurd.
Context, context. It is important.
you counter every argument I make with accusations of 'garbage' or 'out of context', 'twisting scriptures' So I already know your response to what I would say to your questions here. besides I've already answerd your question here it andyou just call it twisting scriptures. So no need to repeat myself.
__________________ God is a spirit (jn 4:24)........... God is not a man...(Nu 23:19) A spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me (Jesus) have (Lu 24:39).....the man Christ Jesus 1 ti 2:5
you counter every argument I make with accusations of 'garbage' or 'out of context', 'twisting scriptures' So I already know your response to what I would say to your questions here.
Then stop using anti-trinitarian websites to attempt to make your case. The conclusions do not follow.
It is absurd for me to directly call you "my friend" and then be referring to your father.lol!!!!
__________________ “You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot by men. “You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.- Our Lord and Savior.
well you omitted some of my heavy proofs that
Thomas could not have been calling Jesus god
I have no idea what you're talking it. Perhaps you are referring to something outside of the context of our present conversation.
I admitted the force of the main point you raised in your first response to me, when I added that Jesus said something comparable to Peter when he said to him, "Get behind me, Satan!" I suspect that from here on out, the major factor in our differing interpretations is our differing views on the fourth gospel in general. I take a strongly "God incarnate" stance, and you are decidedly opposed to such a reading.
i have read several differing views on the subject of john 20.28 from both sides of the issue, even those who believe that Thomas is caling Jesus god, they admit it could possibly be an exclamation.
here is antoher view below that sounds reasonable to me. In fact i may have to change my opinion after reading this from it being an exclamation to it being that Thomas was talking about god and not callling Jesus god.
Going on my own knowledge of Greek, I don't yet find the arguments that you present very persuasive. I will need to look into the usage of voc. Kurie and nom. Kurios myself. I'm pretty sure that the significance of the inflection is slight at best, and hardly conclusive. The overall theological spectrum of the fourth gospel plays a much larger role in interpretative issues.
You've convinced me, at any rate, that this is not a solid Trinitarian passage. Better continue to work on Hentenza!
Thanks for your time. Both of your responses were well-constructed and made me think, and I really do appreciate it.
__________________
...Do not let me hear
Of the wisdom of old men, but rather of their folly,
Their fear of fear and frenzy, their fear of possession, Of belonging to another, or to others, or to God. The only wisdom we can hope to acquire Is the wisdom of humility: humility is endless.
. . . because a lot of people think anything posted on the internet by any unknown person is true if it supports their assumptions/presuppositions.
Originally Posted by Godfixated
here is a good link, 'My Lord and My God'
The following is a real term translation, and then it is followed by a true translation of what John was really expressing.
John 20:27-28(a real term translation in bold)
27 Then he (Messiah Y'Shua) said to Thomas, "Reach here your finger, and see my hands. Reach here your hand, and put it into my side. Don't be faithless, but believing."
28 Thomas answered him, "My Kurios and my Theoss
John 20:27-28(The True "Implied" Translation in bold)
27 Then he (Messiah Y'Shua) said to Thomas, "Reach here your finger, and see my hands. Reach here your hand, and put it into my side. Don't be faithless, but believing."
28 Thomas answered him, "My Supreme Master and My Supreme Godly Leader!"
According to Strong's Concordance (which isn't purely without prejudice) the following are the definitions of Kurios, and Theos.
KURIOS, Strong's #2962: He who is "In Charge" or "In Authority." The Supreme Authority (for a specific realm of influence).
Words in the NT are translated according to long established rules of Greek grammar, and historical usage NOT eeny, meeny, minie, moe arbitrarily picking a definition from a list. "Theos" is a noun not an adjective, it does not mean "godly."
THEOS, Strong's #2316: As a figure of speech, "A Magistrate" or a "Supreme Divinity." OR "godly" (like G-d) (Image of G-d) OR even G-d (G-d is listed only because G-d has G-dly qualities, is Divine, and is also Supreme, but G-d is not the only one with those qualities). Strong's Concordance only lists G-d as a last choice, because anyone that has received G-d's Holy Spirit or Righteous Character has G-dly qualities; and The Messiah certainly has G-dly qualities. As a matter of fact all of YHVH's "Chosen Few" (Elohyim or Godly Children) can be referred to as a Theos.
No source cited. Evidently just an iteration of the beliefs of the website owner.
Note: The Eternal "Self Existent" GOD (YHVH or YHVH) can only be implied with 100% certainty when both Kurios and Theos are placed side by side as in "KURIOS THEOS." The conjunction 'and' (between Kurios 'and' Theos) is not sufficient enough to replace "KURIOS THEOS." This "Side by Side" form of "KURIOS THEOS" is used exclusively in the 'New Testament' (The Epistles) to positively indicate only YHVH, and not His First Appointed Son, Messiah Y'Shua. While Messiah is both a Kurios, 'and' also a Theos, he is not a "KURIOS THEOS."
Where is this supposed rule set out in accredited NT Greek grammars, and or historical usage? Evidently more of the assumptions/presuppositions of the website, and no more meaningful or authoritative than anything found on any other website.
There are zero examples of the Messiah ever being referred to as "KURIOS THEOS" anywhere in the Bible. The following New Testament verses are positive indicators where "KURIOS THEOS" has been used in the Epistles to exclusively indicate YHVH: Luke 1:32, 1:68; 1 Peter 3:15,Revelation 4:8, 11:17, 15:3, 16:7, 18:8, 19:6, 21:22, 22:5, and 22:6. However, when you see "Lord YHVH" or Lord god" in English, this does not necessarily indicate "KURIOS THEOS," as is shown in Jude 1:4. Jude 1:4 says "Lord god," meaning a lesser title than "LORD GOD."
The title Kurios Theos occurs only 13 times in the NT, all but three in Revelation. Not all are clear references to the creator. No proof that Jude 4 means a lesser title.
but in scripture Jesus is always adressed as Kurie, which is vocative. kurios is always used to talk about someone who is lord. And Kurios is the Greek word for lord in john 20.28 so when Thomas was talking to Jesus he was talking about the lord and god to Jesus. So he wasn't calling Jesus my lord and my god, he was talking to Jesus about his lord and god.
Matthew 18:27 And out of pity for him the lord (kurios) of that servant released him and forgave him the debt.
or
Matthew 21:4040 When therefore the owner (kurios) of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?”
Here , in the above quotes,Jesus is talking about a Lord, not talking to a lord.
but here, in matthew 7.21 below, Jesus is being addressed as Lord and the Greek word is Kurie not kurios. it's that way throughout the bible.
Mathew 7.21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ (kurie, kurie) will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.
you can check it out here.
Kyrios in Gospels[link omitted]
it lists every usage of kurie and kurios.
This is all well and good but meaningless. The root word is "Kurios" "Kurie" is the vocative case of the noun "Kurios." Stated briefly the vocative case is the case of direct address. Here is a verse from your link where Jesus address the father as "Kurie," because he was addressing him directly.
Matthew 11:25
25 At that time Jesus declared, “I thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes;
Just because something is posted somewhere on the internet does NOT make it true.
Originally Posted by Godfixated
Some have claimed that the expression “ho theos” used by Thomas in John 20:28 shows that Thomas was calling Jesus the Supreme Being, since “theos” with the definite article usually refers to the only true God.
Actually, the article before THEOS in John 20:28 is used because of the possessive nature of the phrase, literally translated “the god of me”.
Where can this so-called rule be found in any accredited Greek grammar? Answer, nowhere, no how because it is an ad hoc concoction of the website owner to make scripture fit his assumptions/presuppositions.
This kind of possessive usually needs the article. It is the same usage as that used in the phrase used of Satan, “the god of this world”, in 2 Corinthians 4:4. Thus, if the usage in John 20:28 means that Jesus is God Almighty, then one should also reason that Satan is God Almighty.
But for a couple of things. "Satan" is never mentioned in this verse or even the chapter. There are many things called god in this world which cloud men's minds, even their "bellies." Also the god spoken of in this vs. is only "god of this world", which clearly excludes him from being any kind of a mighty god, and certainly not "God almighty."
However, when one person is being referred to, the Greek usually only requires one article, even if two titles are used connected by kai (and). We find an example of this just a few verses before, where two titles are used of the God and Father of Jesus, connected by “kai”:
More made up "rules" not stated in any Greek grammar.
[ . . . ]
pros ton patera mou kai patera humwn kai theon
TOWARD THE FATHER OF ME AND FATHER OF YOU AND GOD
mou kai theon humwn
OF ME AND GOD OF YOU.
Notice the whole phrase “the father of me and father of you and God of me of God of you” has only one article for the whole possessive phrase.
Thus proving that Thomas was addressing Jesus as "The God of me and the Lord of me."
Joh 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Linear Mode
