 |
| The Incredulity of Saint Thomas. (2022, December 12). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Incredulity_of_Saint_Thomas_(Caravaggio) |
John 20:17
legei autee ieesous mee mou haptou oupw gar
IS SAYING TO HER JESUS NOT OF ME BE TOUCHING, NOT YET FOR
3004 0846_6 2424 3361 1473_2 0680 0681 3768 1063
anabebeeka pros ton patera poreuou de pros
I HAVE ASCENDED TOWARD THE FATHER; BE GOING BUT TOWARD
0305 4314 3588 3962 4198 1161 4314
tous adelphous mou kai eipe autois anabainw
THE BROTHERS OF ME AND SAY TO THEM I AM ASCENDING
3588 0080 1473_2 2532 1511_7 0846_93 0305
pros ton patera mou kai patera humwn kai theon
TOWARD THE FATHER OF ME AND FATHER OF YOU AND GOD
4314 3588 3962 1473_2 2532 3962 4771_5 2532 2316
mou kai theon humwn
OF ME AND GOD OF YOU.
1473_2 2532 2316 4771_5
John 20:28
apekrithee thwmas kai eipen autw ho kurios mou
ANSWERED THOMAS AND HE SAID TO HIM THE LORD OF ME
061 2381 2532 1511_7 0846_5 3588 2962 1473_2
kai ho theos mou
AND THE GOD OF ME!
2532 3588 2316 1473_2
The expression GOD OF ME appears in both verses. However, in John 20:28, it is not simply "GOD OF ME", but rather it is "THE GOD OF ME". Verse 28 has the definite article before the form of THEOS, whereas in John 20:17, Jesus did not use the definite article. This difference in the Greek text has led to some to believe that this was designed by God to show that Thomas was not speaking to Jesus as being his "God", but rather that Thomas was referring Jesus' God.
If Thomas was referring to only one person in his statement recorded in John 20:28, the Greek would normally have only required the definite article before the Greek word translated as "lord", as can be seen by the words (in the Greek) that Jesus spoke as recorded in John 20:17. However, Thomas did not follow that pattern in his words recorded in John 20:28, for we find the definite article twice, which could indicate that Thomas could have first referred of Jesus as his Lord and then turned to the God of Jesus and acknowledged him as his God.
Trinitarians, however, claim that it was not the Supreme Being who was standing before Thomas, but applying their "dual natures" dogma, they claim that it was the human being Jesus. This would mean, if actually applied to the context, that Thomas addressed the man Jesus as being his Supreme Being!
To read the trinitarian idea into John 20:28 would require that trinitarian separate verse 20 from verse 19. The trinitarian would also need to add to what is written that Jesus had two natures, one nature of being the Supreme Being and another nature of being a human being. The trinitarian would have to further assume that Thomas knew that Jesus had these two natures, so that when he spoke to the one standing before the words recorded in John 20:28, they would imagine and assume that Thomas was not addressing the human Jesus of their alleged "dual natures" as spoken of in verse 27, but rather the Supreme Being Jesus, even though, according to their application of the context, it was not the Supreme Being Jesus standing there before him. Of course, I do not have any reason to scripturally add all the assumptions that trinitarians have made concerning the alleged "dual natures" of Jesus to what God has revealed, for what God has revealed in the Bible is fully in harmony with itself without adding all those assumptions. Additionally, although trinitarians may deny this, if Jesus has two sentiencies, one that is omniscient, and another that is limited to the sentiency of a human being, this would, in effect, mean that Jesus is two beings, one of which is the Supreme Being, and the other which is a human being, at the same time, and that two relative sentiencies would actually result in Jesus' being two persons.
Nevertheless, assuming that Thomas did refer to Jesus when he said "the god of me", it does not follow that we need to imagine and assume that Thomas meant that Jesus is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and then to further imagine, assume, add to, and read into, what Thomas said that Thomas meant that Jesus was not "God" as Jesus spoke of in John 20:17, but rather imagine and assume that Jesus used the term "God" to mean only one person of "God", and then further imagine and assume that Thomas spoke of Jesus as another person of God. Nor would the possessive usage of the definite article offer any proof that Thomas thought the Supreme Being was standing before him.
We do not find any Biblical tradition for referring to Jesus as "the god of me" (often worded in translations as "my God") or even "the god of us" (often worded as "our God"). In harmony with the rest of the Bible, one should recognize that the Hebrews used the words for "God" not only of the Supreme Being and false gods, but in other ways to denote power, might, strength. Indeed, the basic mean of the Hebrew word often transliterated as EL is strength, might, power, etc. The King James Version can be used to demonstrate this usage in many verses in which the KJV translators rendered forms of the word for "God", not as "God" or "god", but with other words. readily seen by anyone who will carefully note the following texts from the King James Version, in which English translations of forms of the Hebrew word El are in denoted by *..*: “It is in the *power* of my hand.” (Genesis 31:29) “There shall be no *might* in thine hand.” (Deuteronomy 28:32) “Neither is it in our *power*.” (Nehemiah 5:5) “Like the *great* mountains.” (Psalm 36:6) “In the *power* of thine hand to do it.” (Proverbs 3:27) “Pray unto *a god* [mighty one] that cannot save.” (Isaiah 45:20) “Who among the sons of the *mighty*.” (Psalm 89:6) “God standeth in the congregation of the *mighty*.” (Psalm 82:1) “Give unto the Lord [Jehovah] of ye *mighty*.” (Psalm 29:1) “The *mighty* God even the Lord [Jehovah].” (Psalm 50:1) There are other scriptures also that could be used for this. All one need to do to verify the above is to look into the Englishman’s Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance, under Hebrew words #430 and #410. The point is that Thomas, if he did use the Greek word often transliterated as THEOS of Jesus, would more than likely simply making use of such a Hebraism. To render this usage into English as applied to Thomas' words would be something like, "the lord of me and the might of me", or "the lord of me and strength of me", or even "the lord of me and the mighty one of me".
Jesus commended Thomas for his belief concerning Jesus' being resurrected. Jesus did not respond to Thomas by saying that it was good that Thomas recognized him as his God (Supreme Being), as many seem to assume. John stated these things were written, not so that one may believe that Jesus is God (the Supreme Being), but "that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name." -- John 20:31, World English.
There is definitely nothing in John 20:28 that presents Jehovah as being more than one person, or that Jesus is God Almighty, or that Thomas was giving any worship to Jesus as being Jehovah, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
Comments
Post a Comment