Exploring Trinitarian Logic

[Johann]

Your argument is based on Lexicons and grammars that are already biased in favor of Trinitarian beliefs. I encourage you to face the facts of the New Testament witness and make sense of the passage in light of those facts. The fact is, Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Give this fact, Paul is not arguing that Jesus created the world.

 

[MonoBiblical]

it does have a well-established semantic range that includes creating or making-especially in the context of divine actions like creation.

No, it doesn't because non-deities can perform this action. It can be an action or an object.

To argue that ποιέω here refers to merely performing an action that does not result in permanent creation is inconsistent with the broader biblical and linguistic evidence.

Again, this is not true. And I have admitted the lexicons are wrong, but so are you.

It conveys the idea of the cosmic or historical framework in which creation unfolds.

αιων conveys permanent or change. But that is far from what κοσμος implies which is area.

but the core number of cases remains five.

Exactly.

Your statement that Greek has "9 inflections" is imprecise and depends on context.

Nine inflections per declension then. Yes, it depended on context. And I said 5 cases, and perhaps a neuter dual.

Robertson's system is a detailed syntactical framework that accounts for the many roles a single case might play in different contexts.

Only in your imagination. But syntax books ignore some of the basics anyway.

Don’t respond; go back to the basics.

Pull that plank from your eye first.

Jesus is the Creator, and if you choose to dismiss this as "rubbish," that's fine by me-there's already enough unchecked false teaching on this forum.

Not only image-worshiping, i.e. idolatrous rubbis; it is old paganism to think a man can be a god.

 

[Johann]

Your argument is based on Lexicons and grammars that are already biased in favor of Trinitarian beliefs. I encourage you to face the facts of the New Testament witness and make sense of the passage in light of those facts. The fact is, Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Give this fact, Paul is not arguing that Jesus created the world.

The truth, as it is written, is being redefined. Core doctrines-such as Jesus Christ, His death on the Cross, His burial, and glorious resurrection-are being redefined. The virgin birth and Immanuel are also being redefined. What, then, do we have left that will not be "redefined"?

J.

 

[MonoBiblical]

@Johann It is the laws of God which have done more good, not just trust in God or in belief of some imaginary man-god.

 

[MonoBiblical]

Your argument is based on Lexicons and grammars that are already biased in favor of Trinitarian beliefs. I encourage you to face the facts of the New Testament witness and make sense of the passage in light of those facts. The fact is, Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Give this fact, Paul is not arguing that Jesus created the world.

The bias gets removed when you study it carefully. Why doesn't the New Testament make sense after 400 years of translating? There are no changes because there is a vested interest in phallacy and idolatry.

 

[Johann]

@Johann It is the laws of God which have done more good, not just trust in God or in belief of some imaginary man-god.

You fall into one of these categories.
Arianism
Founder: Arius (circa 256–336 AD)
Core Belief: Arianism taught that Jesus, while divine, was not of the same substance as God the Father. Instead, Jesus was created by the Father and, therefore, subordinate to Him. Arians believed that the Son (Jesus) had a beginning and was not co-eternal with the Father, thus rejecting the full deity of Jesus.

Condemnation: Arianism was condemned at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, which affirmed that the Son is of the same substance (homoousios) as the Father.

2. Jehovah's Witnesses
Core Belief: Jehovah's Witnesses hold a view similar to Arianism, teaching that Jesus is a created being, not God Himself. They believe that Jesus, referred to as Michael the Archangel in their theology, was the first creation of Jehovah God and is inferior to Jehovah. They reject the doctrine of the Trinity and do not accept the full deity of Christ.

Scriptural Interpretation: Jehovah's Witnesses interpret certain biblical passages (such as John 1:1) in a way that supports their belief that Jesus is "a god" (small "g"), but not Almighty God.

3. Unitarians
Core Belief: Unitarianism denies the Trinity, asserting that God is a single person, and that Jesus is a human being who was an extraordinary teacher and moral figure but not divine. They reject the concept of the God-man, seeing Jesus as merely a prophet or a special servant of God, not the eternal Son of God.

Historical Background: Unitarianism emerged during the Reformation and became more prominent during the 16th and 17th centuries, especially within certain groups in England and Transylvania.

4. Christadelphians
Core Belief: Christadelphians reject the doctrine of the Trinity and believe that Jesus is the Son of God but not God Himself. They hold that Jesus was a mere mortal man, although specially chosen by God to fulfill His will. Christadelphians believe in the monotheistic nature of God and teach that Jesus was a perfect man, who was born of Mary but did not exist as God before His birth.

5. Oneness Pentecostals (or Apostolic Pentecostals)
Core Belief: Oneness Pentecostals deny the traditional doctrine of the Trinity, teaching that God is a singular, indivisible entity who manifests in different forms, particularly as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They believe Jesus is the full manifestation of God but deny that Jesus is distinct as the second person of the Trinity. For them, Jesus is both fully God and fully human, but the "Father" and "Holy Spirit" are seen as manifestations of Jesus, not separate persons within the Godhead.

6. Some New Age and Non-Christian Beliefs
Core Belief: Certain New Age teachings and non-Christian religious groups might acknowledge Jesus as a wise teacher, prophet, or enlightened being, but they typically deny His divinity and the full God-man nature. Some see Him merely as a moral figure or as a being who achieved a level of divinity, but not as the eternal God incarnate.

7. Islam (Views on Jesus)
Core Belief: Islam holds Jesus (Isa) in high regard as a prophet and messenger of God, but not as God Himself. Muslims reject the doctrine of the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus. They believe that Jesus was a human prophet born of the Virgin Mary, but that He is not divine and that He was not crucified (according to mainstream Islamic teachings).
These groups, among others, diverge significantly from traditional Christian orthodoxy, particularly regarding the nature of Jesus as the God-man, fully divine and fully human, as affirmed in Nicene Christianity.

There is a radical departure from the truth as it is written in Scripture, along with a way of life that is not in agreement with the Scriptures or Christ's imperatives, and not being sealed with the Holy Spirit.

Heartbreaking.

J.

 

[MonoBiblical]

You fall into one of these categories.
Arianism
Founder: Arius (circa 256–336 AD)
Core Belief: Arianism taught that Jesus, while divine, was not of the same substance as God the Father. Instead, Jesus was created by the Father and, therefore, subordinate to Him. Arians believed that the Son (Jesus) had a beginning and was not co-eternal with the Father, thus rejecting the full deity of Jesus.

Condemnation: Arianism was condemned at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, which affirmed that the Son is of the same substance (homoousios) as the Father.

2. Jehovah's Witnesses
Core Belief: Jehovah's Witnesses hold a view similar to Arianism, teaching that Jesus is a created being, not God Himself. They believe that Jesus, referred to as Michael the Archangel in their theology, was the first creation of Jehovah God and is inferior to Jehovah. They reject the doctrine of the Trinity and do not accept the full deity of Christ.

Scriptural Interpretation: Jehovah's Witnesses interpret certain biblical passages (such as John 1:1) in a way that supports their belief that Jesus is "a god" (small "g"), but not Almighty God.

3. Unitarians
Core Belief: Unitarianism denies the Trinity, asserting that God is a single person, and that Jesus is a human being who was an extraordinary teacher and moral figure but not divine. They reject the concept of the God-man, seeing Jesus as merely a prophet or a special servant of God, not the eternal Son of God.

Historical Background: Unitarianism emerged during the Reformation and became more prominent during the 16th and 17th centuries, especially within certain groups in England and Transylvania.

4. Christadelphians
Core Belief: Christadelphians reject the doctrine of the Trinity and believe that Jesus is the Son of God but not God Himself. They hold that Jesus was a mere mortal man, although specially chosen by God to fulfill His will. Christadelphians believe in the monotheistic nature of God and teach that Jesus was a perfect man, who was born of Mary but did not exist as God before His birth.

5. Oneness Pentecostals (or Apostolic Pentecostals)
Core Belief: Oneness Pentecostals deny the traditional doctrine of the Trinity, teaching that God is a singular, indivisible entity who manifests in different forms, particularly as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They believe Jesus is the full manifestation of God but deny that Jesus is distinct as the second person of the Trinity. For them, Jesus is both fully God and fully human, but the "Father" and "Holy Spirit" are seen as manifestations of Jesus, not separate persons within the Godhead.

6. Some New Age and Non-Christian Beliefs
Core Belief: Certain New Age teachings and non-Christian religious groups might acknowledge Jesus as a wise teacher, prophet, or enlightened being, but they typically deny His divinity and the full God-man nature. Some see Him merely as a moral figure or as a being who achieved a level of divinity, but not as the eternal God incarnate.

7. Islam (Views on Jesus)
Core Belief: Islam holds Jesus (Isa) in high regard as a prophet and messenger of God, but not as God Himself. Muslims reject the doctrine of the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus. They believe that Jesus was a human prophet born of the Virgin Mary, but that He is not divine and that He was not crucified (according to mainstream Islamic teachings).
These groups, among others, diverge significantly from traditional Christian orthodoxy, particularly regarding the nature of Jesus as the God-man, fully divine and fully human, as affirmed in Nicene Christianity.

There is a radical departure from the truth as it is written in Scripture, along with a way of life that is not in agreement with the Scriptures or Christ's imperatives, and not being sealed with the Holy Spirit.

Heartbreaking.

J.

You can't even understand the bible from the Greek and you can't tell me why Arianism was or why Athanasius insisted that the christ was twice begotten.

Arians thought they could become sons of gods while still alive. They believed in the old trinity doctrine, but believed in the pre-existence of souls which Hellenic philosophy and religion. I don't deny Jesus is a subgod, but at least he had to die to get there. Origen's hope was that the messiah was permanently begotten, not perpetually begotten. Athanasius offered a solution which was worse and led Augustinianism or origninal. The Messiah had to be twice begotten, and was never non-when.

If the council of Nicea was about Origenism, Arianism was more messed up than you know.

 

[ProDeo]

1. In John 1:1b we read the word was with God. This means that whatever was the word was NOT God at all, right?
2. And in John 1:1c And the word thus cannot be God as in 1:1b we both read that the word was next/towards to God.

Read the Greek - John 1:1 Greek Text Analysis

The Word was with God and God was the Word.

 

[MonoBiblical]

Read the Greek - John 1:1 Greek Text Analysis

The Word was with God and God was the Word.

And the God it was, A word another assumed to be exactly like it was a second word. Now were the individuals the words or were they both God. They are not of the same existence. It is better that Jesus is an individual rather than fully GOD. You don't get the confusion of having three individuals in one.

 

[Johann]

Read the Greek - John 1:1 Greek Text Analysis

The Word was with God and God was the Word.

"was" (thrice) This is an IMPERFECT TENSE (cf. John 1:1,2,4,10) which focuses on continual existence in past time. This TENSE is used to show the Logos' pre-existence (cf. John 8:57-58; 17:5,24; Col. 1:17). It is contrasted with the AORIST TENSES of John 1:3 (i.e., creation), 6 (i.e., John the Baptist, and 14 (i.e., the incarnation).

"the Word" The Greek term logos referred to a message, not just a single word. In this context it is a title which the Greeks used to describe "world reason" and the Hebrews as analogus with "Wisdom." John chose this term to assert that God's Word is both a person and a message. See Contextual Insights, D.

"with God" "With" could be paraphrased "face to face." It depicts intimate fellowship. It also points toward the concept of one divine essence and three personal eternal manifestations. The NT asserts the paradox that Jesus is separate from the Father, but also that He is one with the Father.

SPECIAL TOPIC: THE TRINITY

"the Word was God" This VERB is IMPERFECT TENSE as in John 1:1a. There is no ARTICLE (which identifies the SUBJECT, see F. F. Bruce, Answers to Questions, p. 66) with Theos, but Theos is placed first in the Greek phrase for emphasis. This verse and John 1:18 are strong statements of the full Deity of the pre-existent Logos (cf. John 5:18; 8:58; 10:30; 14:9; 17:11; 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Heb. 1:8; 2 Pet. 1:1). Jesus is fully divine (i.e., the grammatical rule related to two NOUNS with a linking VERB and only one PRONOUN. One must assume the ARTICLE makes both defiite, "Sharp's Rule"), as well as fully human (cf. 1 John 4:1-3). He is not the same as God the Father, but He is the very same divine essence as the Father.

SPECIAL TOPIC: MONOTHEISM

SPECIAL TOPIC: DEITY OF CHRIST FROM THE OT

The NT asserts the full Deity of Jesus of Nazareth, but protects the distinct personhood of the Father. The one divine essence is emphasized in John 1:1; 5:18; 10:30,34-38; 14:9-10; and 20:28, while their distinct persons are emphasized in John 1:2,14,18; 5:19-23; 8:28; 10:25,29; 14:11,12,13,16.

SPECIAL TOPIC: FATHERHOOD OF GOD

1:2 This is parallel to John 1:1 and emphasizes again the shocking truth in light of monotheism (cf. Deut. 6:4-6) that Jesus, who was born around 6-5 B.C., has always been with the Father and, therefore, is Deity.

John 1

J.

 

[Keiw]

The angels know that Elohim is THREE

The demons/fallen angels know that Elohim is THREE

The Holy Scriptures tells us that Elohim is THREE

Why is that you do not know???

Elohim translates-The supreme one or the mighty one or God in the Hebrew language for the true God in the OT--nothing plural about it for him.

 

[Keiw]

Incorrect.

Bereshis (in the Beginning) was the Dvar Hashem [YESHAYAH 55:11; BERESHIS 1:1], and the Dvar Hashem was agav (along with) Hashem [MISHLE 8:30; 30:4], and the Dvar Hashem was nothing less, by nature, than Elohim! [Psa 56:11(10); Yn 17:5; Rev. 19:13]

--and the Word. FS101, +Deu_32:42, By Hyperbaton, the subject, "the Word," being defined by the article which is prefixed to it, can be placed at the end of two of the clauses, and in each case we are to put the stress on "the Word." FS77, +Exo_3:19, Bengel notes that "when the predicate precedes the subject, there is an epitasis (an emphatic enlargement of the subject)" as also in Jhn_4:24 (New Testament Word Studies, vol. 1, p. 543). *Jhn_10:30-33; +**Jhn_20:28, +*Psa_45:6, +*Isa_7:14; +*Isa_9:6; Isa_40:9-11, Mat_1:23, *Rom_9:5, **Php_2:6 note. *1Ti_3:16, **Tit_2:13, *Heb_1:8-13, **2Pe_1:1 g. 1Jn_5:7; 1Jn_5:20.

was God. Not "a god," for the lack of the Greek article here does not make "God" indefinite, but determines which term ("Word" or "God") is to be the subject of the linking verb "was." Greek word order is somewhat more flexible than English, for in English statement sentences the predicate nominative always follows the linking verb. But the literal order of the Greek words here is "and God was the Word" (kai theos ēn o logos), the subject "Word" follows the verb, and the predicate nominative "God" precedes the verb, the reverse of English word order.

Since this clause uses a linking verb, both the subject and the predicate nominative are in the nominative case, so case endings do not serve to identify the subject in this construction; rather, the article "the" points out the subject of the clause. Greek uses the article "the" to accomplish what English does by word order. Thus, if John had placed the article "the" before "God," the meaning would be "God was the Word;" if he had placed the article "the" before both "Word" and "God," the meaning would be convertible or reversible: it would mean equally "God was the Word," and "The Word was God," but this John did not do.

By placing the article "the" before "Word," "Word" must be the subject of the linking verb "was," and the statement can only be rendered "the Word was God." Just as mistaken is the rendering "the Word was divine," for "God," lacking the article, is not thereby an adjective, or rendered qualitative when it precedes a linking verb followed by a noun which does have the article.

See the note on Mat_27:54 for scholarly documentation and an explanation of this construction known technically as the "anarthrous noun." Translators and translations which choose to render this phrase "a god" or "divine," are motivated by theological, not grammatical, considerations.

The phrase "a god" is particularly objectionable, because it makes Christ a lesser "god," which is polytheism, and contrary to the express declaration of Scripture elsewhere (Deu_32:39). For clearly if Christ is "a god," then he must be either a "true god" or a "false god." If "true," we assert polytheism; if "false," he is unworthy of our credence.

John’s high view of Christ expressed throughout his Gospel, climaxing in the testimony of Thomas, who addressed Christ as "my Lord and my God," is asserted from this opening statement, "the Word was God." There is no legitimate basis for understanding his declaration in any lesser sense than affirming the full deity of our Savior. **Jhn_5:18; +*Jhn_8:35; +*Jhn_8:58; +*Jhn_8:59; +*Jhn_10:30; +*Jhn_10:33; +*%+Jhn_10:34; Jhn_14:7; +**Jhn_20:28, +*Deu_32:39, +*Job_19:26, Isa_7:14; Isa_9:6; *Isa_43:10; **Isa_44:6, **Jer_23:5; **Jer_23:6, +*Mic_5:2, %Act_12:22; **Act_20:28, Rom_9:5, %*2Co_4:4, Eph_5:5 g. **Php_2:6 note. 2Th_1:12 g. 1Ti_3:16, **Tit_2:13 g. +*Heb_1:8, **2Pe_1:1 g. Rev_21:7.

J.

Your scholars know 100% that the Word at John 1:1is given the same exact word as satan is given at 2 Cor 4:4-- So either satan is God or the Word is a god. We know satan is not God. Your supposed scholars know this is 100% fact.

 

[David in NJ]

Elohim translates-The supreme one or the mighty one or God in the Hebrew language for the true God in the OT--nothing plural about it for him.

FALSE

Elohim in Hebrew is PLURAL = even the chabad rabbis know Elohim and Elohenu is PLURAL

 

[Wrangler]

why Athanasius insisted that the christ was twice begotten.

Great, great point! To answer this question means admitting the trinity doctrine evolved over time.

This conflicts with their basic hypothesis that it was understood from Genesis 1:1 all the way to through Apostolic writings uninterrupted until the Nicene Creed formalized what everyone already knew all along.

Fact is, creeds are only made as a reaction to a group promoting an alternative. No creed or law was ever passed warning against the dangers of flapping your arms to fly to the moon. This is because everyone knows you can’t do that.

Believing a son was created by his father, by contrast, is something everyone knows, not just believes. Yet, Athanasius, that supposed trinitarian saint, was good enough to get a creed passed that Jesus was created by God, not once but twice.

I look forward the the logical trinitarian setting all this straight.

 

[Marvelloustime]

wrangler The bible DOES say that GOD was the WORD ,
so when the WORD became flesh , well YOU FIGURE IT OUT . GOD IS HIS WORD
HIS WORD became flesh . Repeat that truth a few thousand times till it sinks in real deep .
Now i understand the Godhead may not be understood , and specially at the first .
BUT what i do KNOW IS
we nor any man ought to TWIST THE BIBLE to fit what WE beleive . Rather just BELEIVE what is written
and understanding will COME in time .

@amigo de christo

 

[Marvelloustime]

While its true that so very many trinitarians now follow another spirit
And its hard to even find some that speak truth and live according to THE TRUTH , THE SPIRIT .
Bud i aint never found one WHO DENIES the DIETY of CHRIST who walks according to the SPIRIT .
Now we do have us a massive problem with the churches today . MANY do work as one
all right , the ONLY problem is the ONE they work UNDER and cliam and believe to be GOD and HIS LOVE
AINT GOD OR HIS LOVE . a nasty delusion cloaked under the word love has infiltrated most all of christendom .
It is merging all the false religoins as well as many , so very many , within Christendom
to be as one , to have common ground , to believe THE LIE that GOD is in all religons
and everyone who loveth is born of GOD . ONLY the problem is THEIR VERSION OF LOVETH
and everyone who loveth , SURE SEEMS TO ACCEPTS SIN and lies and has teeth and anger agaisnt THE TRUTH
that exposes thier sin and unbelief . SO that is known as A DELUISION . a strong one too
as it unites the LOST to be as one under what they all think IS GOD , IS LOVE and is loving . AND IT SURE
hates on the words of GOD , the WORD of GOD , the saints who wont conform . NOT lookinggood my friend . Not looking good at all .

@amigo de christo

 

[IronMaiden]

Read the Greek - John 1:1 Greek Text Analysis

The Word was with God and God was the Word.

ahhh… It’s cool that warm fuzzy feeling you get when you hear the true Word of God.

John 10:30-33 I and my Father are one…
John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said to him, My LORD and my God.
Psalm 45:6 Your throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the scepter of your kingdom …
Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin …
Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given: and the government …
Isaiah 40:9-11 O Zion, that bring good tidings, get you up into the high mountain; …
Matthew 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, …
Romans 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ …
Philippians 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was …
Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the …
Hebrews 1:8-13 But to the Son he said, Your throne, O God, is for ever and ever: …
2 Peter 1:1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ…
1 John 5:7,20 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, …

 

[Johann]

Your scholars know 100% that the Word at John 1:1is given the same exact word as satan is given at 2 Cor 4:4-- So either satan is God or the Word is a god. We know satan is not God. Your supposed scholars know this is 100% fact.

Biblical Verses That Call Jesus God

In this post, I am going to cite some of the biblical texts that apply the term God to Jesus.

The prophet Isaiah announced that a virgin would conceive and give birth to a Son who would be called Immanuel:

“Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” Isaiah 7:14

The Apostle Matthew provides an inspired commentary and the application of this prophecy and the meaning of the name:

“Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily. But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us (meth’ hemon HO Theos [THE God]).” Matthew 1:18-23

The foregoing explains the reason why the virgin-born Son is called Immanuel, e.g., Christ happens to be the very God of heaven who came down to be born as a man in order to save his people from their sins.

Matthew reinforces this point of Jesus’ being God in the flesh by concluding his Gospel in the same manner in which he began it, namely, he cites the risen Christ’s promise to continue to be with his people till the end of the age:

“Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted. And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway (ego meth’ hymon eimi), even unto the end of the world. Amen.” Matthew 28:16-20

This helps us appreciate why Isaiah would go on to proclaim that the Messiah is the Mighty God himself coming to be born as a human Child in order to rule on David’s throne forever:

“For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God (El Gibbor), The everlasting Father,The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.” Isaiah 9:6-7

The significance and magnificence of this name can be seen by the fact that the prophet identifies Jehovah as the Mighty God in the very next chapter!

“And it shall come to pass in that day, that the remnant of Israel, and such as are escaped of the house of Jacob, shall no more again stay upon him that smote them; but shall stay upon the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, in truth. The remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the mighty God (El Gibbor).” Isaiah 10:20-21

That even Jewish sources believed that the Child appointed to rule on David’s throne was the Messiah can be seen from the Aramaic paraphrase of Isaiah known as the Targum:

“The prophet said to the house of David, For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given, and He has taken the law upon Himself to keep it. His name is called from eternity, Wonderful, The Mighty God who liveth to eternity, The Messiah, whose peace shall be great upon us in His days. The greatness of those who do the law shall be magnified, and to those, that preserve peace. There shall be no end to the throne of David, and of his kingdom, to establish it and build it in judgment and in righteousness from henceforth, even for ever. By the Word of the Lord of hosts this shall be done.” (The Chaldee Paraphrase on the Prophet Isaiah by Jonathan b. Uzziel, translated by Rev. C. W. H. Pauli, Presbyter. London: London Society’s House, 16, Lincoln’s Inn Fields, 1871], pp. 30-31 The Chaldee Paraphrase on the Prophet Isaiah bold and underline emphasis mine)

Continue-

 

[Johann]

2-

The Deity of Christ and the Granville Sharp Construction

As I had stated in another post (Paul’s Divine Christology Pt. 3), the NT writings employ a particular expression that scholars and grammarians call a Granville Sharp construction. Granville Sharp was an 18th-century Christian abolitionist and philanthropist who produced a monograph in 1798 on the NT use of the Greek definite article as it relates to the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ.

According to Sharp’s first rule, when two singular personal nouns, adjectives or participles are connected by the conjunction kai (“the”), with the definite article appearing before the first noun/adjective/participle, then both nouns/adjectives/participles refer to one and the same individual.

The following NT passage is an example of this rule where Jesus is explicitly identified as God:

“Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ (tou Theou hemon kai Soteros, ‘Iesou Christou):” 2 Peter 1:1 New King James Version (NKJV)

The Greek literally reads, “of THE God of us and Savior, Jesus Christ.” Since both nouns are singular and connected by the conjunction kai, with the article appearing only before the first noun, they are both describing Christ.

tn The terms “God and Savior” both refer to the same person, Jesus Christ. This is one of the clearest statements in the NT concerning the deity of Christ. The construction in Greek is known as the Granville Sharp rule, named after the English philanthropist-linguist who first clearly articulated the rule in 1798. Sharp pointed out that in the construction article-noun-καί-noun (where καί [kai] = “and”), when two nouns are singular, personal, and common (i.e., not proper names), they always had the same referent. Illustrations such as “the friend and brother,” “the God and Father,” etc. abound in the NT to prove Sharp’s point. In fact, the construction occurs elsewhere in 2 Peter, strongly suggesting that the author’s idiom was the same as the rest of the NT authors’ (cf., e.g., 1:11 [“the Lord and Savior”], 2:20 [“the Lord and Savior”]). The only issue is whether terms such as “God” and “Savior” could be considered common nouns as opposed to proper names. Sharp and others who followed (such as T. F. Middleton in his masterful The Doctrine of the Greek Article) demonstrated that a proper name in Greek was one that could not be pluralized. Since both “God” (θεός, theos) and “savior” (σωτήρ, sōtēr) were occasionally found in the plural, they did not constitute proper names, and hence, do fit Sharp’s rule. Although there have been 200 years of attempts to dislodge Sharp’s rule, all attempts have been futile. Sharp’s rule stands vindicated after all the dust has settled. For more information on the application of Sharp’s rule to 2 Pet 1:1, see ExSyn 272, 276-77, 290. See also Titus 2:13 and Jude 4. (New English Translation [NET] 2 Peter 1; underline emphasis mine)

Peter’s letter employs a Sharp construction four other times, which no serious scholar doubts refer to Christ:

“For in this way the entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (tou Kyriou hemon kai Soteros, ‘Iesou Christou) will be abundantly provided for you.” 2 Peter 1:11

“For if after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (tou Kyriou kai Soteros, ‘Iesou Christou), and they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning.” 2 Peter 2:20

“that you should remember the words that were spoken previously by the holy prophets and the commandment of our Lord and Savior (tou Kyriou kai Soteros) spoken through us, the apostles.” 2 Peter 3:2

“But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (tou Kyriou hemon kai Soteros, ‘Iesou Christou). To Him be glory, both now and forever. Amen.” 2 Peter 3:18

The last example is rather amazing seeing that it ends with a doxology to the risen Jesus. Since doxologies are ascriptions of praise to God, this merely reinforces the fact that the inspired Apostle has started off his letter by describing Jesus as the God of all believers. After all, if Peter can offer up a doxology to the risen Christ then he surely would have no problem calling him God.

The blessed Apostle has also attributed to the risen Lord the very language that Isaiah ascribes to Jehovah:

“Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the Lord? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.” Isaiah 45:21-22

continue-

 

[Johann]

3

Here’s the Greek rendering:

“If they will declare, let them draw nigh, that they may know together, who has caused these things to be heard from the beginning: then was it told you. I am God, and there is not another beside me; [he who is the] Righteous One and [the] Savior (Dikaios kai Soter); there is none but me. Turn to me, and you shall be saved, you that [come] from the end of the earth: I am God (ego eimi ho Theos), and there is none other.”

Now compare this with what Peter wrote:

“… To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ (en dikaiosyne tou Theou hemon kai Soteros, ‘Iesou Christou).” NKJV

This shows that for Peter, Jesus is the righteous God and Savior who summons all the ends of the earth to look to him for salvation.

Interestingly, Christ is even called the Righteous/Just One by Peter and others, which, as we saw, is a title attributed to Jehovah in the Greek version of Isaiah:

“When Peter saw it, he answered the people: ‘Men of Israel, why do you marvel at this man? Or why do you stare at us, as if by our own power or piety we had made him walk? The God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified His Son Jesus, whom you handed over and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to release Him. You denied the Holy and Righteous One (ton Hagion kai Dikaion) and asked for a murderer to be granted to you, and you killed the Creator of Life, whom God has raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses.” Acts 3:12-15 Modern English Version (MEV)

Note how the Apostle describes Christ as the Creator of life who was killed but then resurrected. And:

“Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One (tou Dikaiou); of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:” Acts 7:52

“And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One (ton Dikaion), and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.” Acts 22:14

The above citations make it crystal clear that the inspired Apostle did indeed refer to his risen Lord as the God of all true believers.

And now to my final example:

“For there are certain men who crept in secretly, even those who were long ago written about for this condemnation: ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into indecency, and denying our only Master, God, and Lord, Jesus Christ (ton monon despoten Theon, kai Kyrion hemon ‘Iesoun Christon).” Jude 1:4 World English Bible (WEB)

This, too, is a Granville Sharp construction, and is therefore another instance where Jesus is said to be God. However, there is a variant reading in the extant copies of this verse, where the word for God doesn’t appear in some of the manuscripts. The following version reflects this fact:

“… and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord (ton monon Despoten kai Kyrion hemon ‘Iesoun Christon).” New International Version (NIV)

Instead of identifying Jesus as our only Master, God and Lord, the risen Christ is said to be the believers’ one and only Sovereign Lord. And yet either reading still leaves us with Jude declaring Jesus to be truly divine, since the words Despotes and Kyrios are ascribed to Jehovah God in the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible.

“Therefore thus says the Lord, the Lord of hosts (Κyrios ho Despotes sabaoth), Woe to the mighty [men] of Israel; for my wrath shall not cease against mine adversaries, and I will execute judgment on mine enemies.” Isaiah 1:24 LXX

“Behold now, the Lord, the Lord of hosts (ho Despotes Kyrios sabaoth), will take away from Jerusalem and from Judea the mighty man and mighty woman, the strength of bread, and the strength of water,” Isaiah 3:1 LXX

In fact, the Greek translation even applies the words Kyrios monos to Jehovah:

“And Esdras said,You are the only Lord (Kyrios monos); you made the heaven, and the heaven of heavens, and all their array, the earth, and all things that are in it, the seas, and all things in them; and you give life all things, and the hosts of heaven worship you.” Nehemiah 9:6 LXX

Kyrios monos is the Greek rendering of the Hebrew YHVH labaddeka, i.e., “Jehovah alone”. Hence, for a Greek-speaking Jew like Jude to confess someone as their only Lord is to identify that One as Jehovah since Jehovah is the only Lord that a true believer can ever profess and look to, especially in heaven.

And yet, according to Jude, it is the risen Christ who sits enthroned in heaven that is the believers’ monos Kyrios, which means the exact same thing that Kyrios monos does. Jude has essentially described Jesus as the Jehovah God of the Hebrew Scriptures, a fact confirmed by what this inspired writer states in the next verse:

“Now I desire to remind you (even though you have been fully informed of these facts once for all) that JESUS (ho ‘Iesous), having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, later destroyed those who did not believe.” Jude 1:5 NET

Jesus is said to be the One who delivered Israel during the time of Moses and subsequently punished them in the wilderness for their disobedience. One could not ask for a more emphatic witness to Christ’s prehuman existence as Jehovah God!(1)

As the NET Bible’s notes explain:

tc Most later witnesses (P Ψ 5 88 1175 1611 1735 2492 M sy) have θεόν (theon, “God”) after δεσπότην (despotēn, “master”), which appears to be a motivated reading in that it explicitly links “Master” to “God” in keeping with the normal NT pattern (see Luke 2:29; Acts 4:24; 2 Tim 2:21; Rev 6:10). In patristic Greek, δεσπότης (despotēs) was used especially of God (cf. BDAG 220 s.v. 1.b.). The earlier and better witnesses (P א A B C 0251 33 81 323 436 442 1241 1243 1739 2344 al co) lack θεόν; the shorter reading is thus preferred on both internal and external grounds.

sn The construction our Master and Lord, Jesus Christ in v. 4 follows Granville Sharp’s rule (see note on Lord). The construction STRONGLY IMPLIES the deity of Christ. This is followed by a statement that Jesus was involved in the salvation (and later judgment) of the Hebrews. He is thus to be IDENTIFIED WITH THE LORD GOD, YAHWEH. Verse 5, then, simply fleshes out what is implicit in v. 4.

tc The reading ᾿Ιησοῦς (Iēsous, “Jesus”) is deemed too hard by several scholars, since it involves the notion of Jesus acting in the early history of the nation Israel (the NA has “the Lord” instead of “Jesus”). However, not only does this reading enjoy the strongest support from A VARIETY OF EARLY WITNESSES (e.g., A B 33 81 88 322 424 665 915 1241 (1735: “the Lord Jesus”) 1739 1881 2298 2344 vg co eth Or Cyr Hier Bede), but the plethora of variants demonstrate that scribes were uncomfortable with it, for they seemed to exchange κύριος (kurios, “Lord”) or θεός (theos, “God”) for ᾿Ιησοῦς (though P has the intriguing reading θεὸς Χριστός [theos Christos, “God Christ”] for ᾿Ιησοῦς). As difficult as the reading ᾿Ιησοῦς is, in light of v. 4 and in light of the progress of revelation (Jude being one of the last books in the NT to be composed), it is wholly appropriate. The NA text now also reads Ιησοῦς. For defense of this reading, see Philipp Bartholomä, “Did Jesus Save the People out of Egypt: A Re-examination of a Textual Problem in Jude 5, ” NovT 50 (2008): 143-58. (NET Bible Jude 1; capital and underline emphasis mine)

Continue