John 20:28 response to Garyneal

by Blue Grass 41 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Blue Grass
    Blue Grass

    This thread is a response to a comment garyneal made on another thread in which he said:

    "Ask them to explain John 20:28, 'Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"' I would be real interested in what their response is.You see, in the Greek the text is definitive and is totally unanswerable. This is because the word theos is preceded by the definite article ho where Thomas says THE GOD OF ME to Jesus. The literal translation is, "The Lord of me and the God of me." "

    I started to respond on the thread this comment was originally made but I didn't want to hijack that thread and I feel this topic deserves it's own thread.

    In a nutshell Greek has four cases when it comes to nouns:Nominative, Genitive, Accusative, and Vocative.The Nominative case marks the subject of a verb(a noun performing an action), the Genitive case marks a noun as being the possessor of another noun(i.e The man's hat.), the accusative marks the object of the verb(a noun affected by a verb), and the Vocative case is used when a noun is being directly addressed. Here some examples of these cases in English:

    Nominative:The girl baked a cake. (Here girl is the nominative because she performs the act of baking)

    The dog barked at the cat. (Here the dog is the one barking.)

    Genitive:Have you ever been to Dave's house? (Dave owns the house.)

    Have you seen John's new car?(John owns the car)

    Accusative:The girl baked a cake.(The cake is the object of the verb 'bake'.)

    The dog barked at the cat.(The cat is the object of the verb 'bark'.)

    Vocative:Hey Mike! Where are you going?(Mike is being directly addressed.)

    Nice to see you again Bob.(Bob is being directly addressed.)

    In Greek a masculine noun such as Κυριος (Lord) is spelled differently in each of the 4 cases and the definite article(Ο) is different in the first 3 cases while no definite article is used for the Vocative:

    Nominative: Ο Κυριος

    Genitive: Του Κυριου

    Accusative: Τον Κυριο

    Vocative: Κυριε

    Now let's take a look at John 20:28 in the Greek text:

    28 και απεκριθη Θωμας και ειπεν αυτω ο Κυριος μου και ο Θεος μου.

    As you can see both Κυριος(Lord) and Θεος(God) are in the nominative and not in the vocative. If Thomas was directly addressing Jesus rather than speaking about Jesus than there would of been no definite articles in front of Lord and God and both words would of been spelled differently. Everywhere else in the New Testament when Jesus is directly addressed as Lord it is always in the Vocative case. This would be the only verse in the entire New Testament where Jesus would be addressed as Lord in the Nominative case.

    Of course I didn't go into great detail here because I'm trying to make things as simple as possible, but if anyone else with knowledge of the Greek language have anything to add that will be greatly appreciated.

    A few links for those who would to verify this information:

    http://www.ntgreek.org/learn_nt_greek/nouns1.htm

    http://mkatz.web.wesleyan.edu/grk101/linked_pages/grk101.grklanguage.html#cases?

    http://faculty.fairfield.edu/rosivach/greekgrammar/noun-case.htm

    http://www.xanthi.ilsp.gr/filog/ch2/gram/masc_nouns.asp

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    So who was Thomas addressing?

    and:

    but if anyone else with knowledge of the Greek language have anything to add that will be greatly appreciated.

    Careful what you wish for...

  • Titus
    Titus

    According to that, Thomas wasn't addressing Lord Jesus, but Lord Jehovah. Did I understand it correctly?

  • jonathan dough
    jonathan dough

    I wouldn't rely strictly on your Greek to understand these verses. From: http://144000.110mb.com/trinity/index-7.html#35

    Thomas called the resurrected Jesus “My Lord and my God” - (John 20:26 - 29)

    The Jehovah's Witnesses also contend that even the apostles never thought that Jesus was God, but this ignores John 20:26-29 where Thomas, after witnessing the risen Christ, calls Jesus “My Lord and My God.”

    The Jehovah's Witnesses reject this traditional Christian view and teach that Thomas thought of Jesus as no more than a special human occupying a “position far higher” than men and judges who were addressed as “gods” in the Old Testament (see John 10:34, 35 RS; Ps 82:1-6) (Reasoning, 213). Thus, Jesus was “like a god” (Should You Believe, Chapter 9). They also suggest “that Thomas may simply have made an emotional exclamation of astonishment spoken to Jesus but directed to God” (ibid.).

    First, this position ignores the common sense fact that Jesus had just appeared out of thin air, risen from the dead, and any Old Testament comparison to special god-like men are woefully misplaced.

    Secondly, Thomas was engaged in a direct conversation with Jesus, not God in heaven, when he uttered those words. He answered Jesus who replied to him in return and nothing in those verses remotely suggests Thomas was speaking to the heavenly Father or referring to Him.

    Eight days later, his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. The doors were shut, but Jesus came and stood among them, and said, “Peace be with you.” Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing.” Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God.” (John 20:26-29 RSV)

    Third, calling out “My God” in astonishment would have amounted to taking God’s name in vain and blasphemy in violation of Exodus 20:7 and Leviticus 24:16, crimes punishable by death.

    Fourth, Thomas was fully cognizant of the many miracles Jesus performed, in addition to Christ’s implicit and explicit references to himself as God. It truly stretches credulity to think that Thomas thought of Jesus as nothing more or less than a resurrected man. Casting all doubt aside, Thomas knew that Jesus was his Lord and his God. His answer to Christ “forms a literary inclusion with the first verse of the gospel: “and the Word was God” (NAB notes John 20, 28).

    Fifth, highly significant is Thomas’ use of “Lord” and the manner in which “Lord” is tied directly to God. Here, Lord refers to God in the supreme sense because there can only be “one Lord” according to Paul at 1 Corinthians 8:6, 7 and Ephesians 4:5. Although Lord (Greek kurios) has a wide application and can apply to men as a title of honor, such a lower meaning of Lord was eventually superceded by the higher meaning after Christ’s resurrection, and this is the meaning employed by Doubting Thomas.

    (11) His purpose did not become clear to the disciples until after His resurrection, and the revelation of His Deity consequent thereon. Thomas, when he realized the significance of the presence of a mortal wound in the body of a living man, immediately joined with it the absolute title of Deity, saying, “my Lord and my God,” Jn 20:28. Thereafter, except in Acts 10:4 and Rev. 7:14, there is no record that kurios was ever again used by believers in addressing any save God and the Lord Jesus; cf Acts 2:47 with 4:29, 30.

    (12) How soon and how completely the lower meaning had been superseded is seen in Peter’s declaration in his first sermon after the resurrection, “God hath made Him - Lord,” Acts 2:36, and in the house of Cornelius, “He is Lord of all,” Acts 10:36, cf. Deut 10:14; Mt 11:25; Acts 17:24. (Strong and Vine’s, 147)

    “The full significance of this association of Jesus with God under the one appellation, “Lord,” is seen when it is remembered that these men belonged to the only monotheistic race in the world. To associate with the Creator one known to be a creature, however exalted, though possible to Pagan philosophers, was quite impossible to a Jew” (ibid., 147, 148 (16).

    Sixth, as we learned earlier, (see section 23) ascribing to both Jesus and God a role which can only be filled by one “Person” must lead one to conclude that Jesus is God. So, if Jesus alone is Lord in the highest sense, and God is Lord, then Jesus must be God. If both God and Jesus are sovereign Lord and master over all and eternal savior, and there can be only one such Lord over all, then consequently Jesus must be God. Similarly, God is Lord of heaven and earth, but Jesus also has all power and authority in heaven and on earth. These roles are not mutually exclusive as there can only be one such sovereign when read together. Therefore, Jesus was, and is, God.

    Given the above, the Christian confession “Jesus is Lord” at Romans 10:9 takes on a heightened significance in that Jesus is acknowledged not as mere man, or angel, but God. “[K]urios is the NT representative of Heb. Jehovah (‘LORD’ in Eng. Versions), see Mt 4:7; Jas 5:11” (Strong and Vines,147).

    Seventh, Psalm 110:1 makes all of this abundantly clear. It says, “A statement of Jehovah to my Lord: Sit at my right hand, until I place your enemies as your footstool” (Green’s Literal Translation). The “Lord” of this verse refers specifically to Jesus, but this “Lord” in the Hebrew is adonay, which is “used as a proper name of God, only” (Strong and Vine’s, 6). “In the form adonay the word means “Lord par excellence or “Lord over all …” (ibid.). It is “used exclusively as a divine name” (ibid., 4). Jesus, therefore, was, and is, God, because Jehovah called Him adonay, Lord over all, and Peter also referred to Him as Lord of all (Acts 10:36).

    Eighth, one of Christ’s disciples, Stephen, when stoned to death, cried out “Lord, Jesus, receive my spirit” (Acts 7:59). No doubt Stephen was familiar with Ecclesiastes 12:7 “…and the spirit returns to God who gave it” (RSV, Green’s Literal Translation). Stephen was not beseeching an angel to take back his spirit, but the Word who was, and is, God the Son, and who gave Stephen his spirit and to whom it would return.

    Ninth, when Thomas said "My Lord and my God," he used the exact words that David used at Psalm 35:23 with reference to God, writing, "Awake, be vigilant in my defense, in my cause, My God and my Lord," (RSV, NAB, KJV and Green's Literal Translation). "Lord" here is translated from the Hebrew adonai used exclusively of God. Thomas would never have used these same words when addressing the risen Christ if he were just a man. The Jehovah's Witnesses' New World Translation changes verse 23 to read in part, "My God, even Jehovah."

  • Blue Grass
    Blue Grass
    According to that, Thomas wasn't addressing Lord Jesus, but Lord Jehovah. Did I understand it correctly?

    No Thomas isn't addressing anyone in this verse. By saying "my Lord and my God" Thomas is now acknowledging after his previous disbelief that his Lord Jesus has been resurrected by his God. Before seeing Jesus Thomas didn't believe his Lord was alive but when he finally sees him alive he acknowledges him and he acknowledges the power of God with the phrase "my Lord and my God".

  • Blue Grass
    Blue Grass

    Jonathan the link you posted isn't really an appropriate response to my opening post as it doesn't speak of what John 20:28 says in the original Greek text which is what I based my entire post on.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia
    Of course I didn't go into great detail here because I'm trying to make things as simple as possible

    Ah, because what you forgot to mention is that the nominative was frequently used for direct address (Nominative of Address), indeed more frequently than the vocative (almost 600 times in the NT, twice as many as vocatives) which makes your post largely beside the point. Some examples: Mark 15:34 (compare the parallel in Matthew 27:46 where the vocative is used), Luke 8:54, John 19:3, Ephesians 5:22, Revelation 4:11, 15:2 (notice here that the vocative and the nominative are used together), etc. God especially is addressed with the nominative rather than the vocative in the NT.

    If Thomas was directly addressing Jesus rather than speaking about Jesus than there would of been no definite articles in front of Lord and God

    What is that based on? The nominative of address could be either articular or anarthrous. In this case, the diction is probably influenced by the OT, particularly the phrasing found in the Psalms. Examples:

    "Pay attention to the voice of my petition, my King and my God (ho basileus mou kai ho theos mou), because to you I will pray, O Lord" (Psalm 5:2 LXX).

    "Wake up! And pay attention to my trial, my God and my Lord (ho theos mou kai ho kurios mou), to my case!" (Psalm 35:23 LXX).

    "Indeed a sparrow found itself a home and a turtledove a nest for herself where she will lay her young: your altars, O Lord of hosts, my King and my God (ho basileus mou kai ho theos mou)" (Psalm 84:3 LXX).

  • Black Sheep
    Black Sheep
    No Thomas isn't addressing anyone in this verse

    How can you say that? Did you even read the passage?

    Grammar, grammar, grammar. This is simple stuff. You learned it at school, years ago. You can't invent your own rules of grammar to suit your own beliefs every time you come across a Bible passage that disagrees with them.

    If you think the grammar supports the notion that Thomas wasn't talking to anyone, please demonstrate how that is the case. Don't just make a statement that breaks the rules of grammar and expect us all to believe it.

    Cheers

    Chris

  • Blue Grass
    Blue Grass

    Mary says "What is that based on? The nominative of address could be either articular or anarthrous."

    That's based on the fact that EVERY time Jesus is addressed as Lord in the New Testament it's in the Vocative case and never in the Nominative case.

    Mark 15:34 (compare the parallel in Matthew 27:46 where the vocative is used

    This one boils down to interpretation. Mark viewed Jesus words as a quotation of Psalms while Matthew view it as Jesus actually talking to God. Grammatically speaking they are both correct depending on whether Jesus was quoting or not.

    Luke 8:54, John 19:3, Ephesians 5:22, Revelation 4:11, 15:2

    I fail to see your point in the first 3 verses. Can you be more specific as what you want me to look at in those verses because I didn't see anything unusual. Concerning Revelation you know that book in written in poor Greek with many grammatical errors so it really doesn't make sense for us to use that book as a model when it contains errors.

    How can you say that? Did you even read the passage?
    Grammar, grammar, grammar. This is simple stuff. You learned it at school, years ago. You can't invent your own rules of grammar to suit your own beliefs every time you come across a Bible passage that disagrees with them.
    If you think the grammar supports the notion that Thomas wasn't talking to anyone, please demonstrate how that is the case. Don't just make a statement that breaks the rules of grammar and expect us all to believe it.

    Did you even read my opening post? Are you not aware that we're not using the rules of English as the passage was not written in English?

    Ah, because what you forgot to mention is that the nominative was frequently used for direct address (Nominative of Address), indeed more frequently than the vocative (almost 600 times in the NT, twice as many as vocatives) which makes your post largely beside the point.

    I've never heard such a claim, can you please give some examples. For the record I didn't see a Nominative acting as Vocative in any of the New Testament verses you posted minus the quotation in Mark.

  • garyneal
    garyneal

    Blue Grass,

    Thanks for starting this new thread, I have to admit I am intrigued by what you are saying but I am having a very difficult time coming to the same conclusions that you came to. As I said on the thread where this began, I understand that translating from one language to another is not simply a strict one to one word translation but requires getting the jist of what was being said in the source langauge based on its rules for grammar and context. My brief studying of the Spanish and Japanese languages taught me at least this much.

    However, I still find it difficult to come to the same conclusions that you came to. You say that Thomas isn't addressing anyone, so what do the words, "AND answerED THE THOMAS AND said to-Him" part convey?

    I must admit, I find this very fascinating as I am learning new things about this but your argument have so far failed to convince me. Not that I am saying that you are wrong, it is just that I cannot so far prove you right.

    but if anyone else with knowledge of the Greek language have anything to add that will be greatly appreciated.

    I would love that very much and I would also like to see what authoritative greek scholars had to say one way or the other concerning this verse in particular. Kudos to Leolaia for her contribution.

    You see, here's the problem I see. Let's assume that you are indeed correct and that Thomas was not addressing anyone, would not the Bible translators take care to convey this into English? Yet, anyone with an English language translation would immediately from the straight reading of this verse would come away with Thomas saying my Lord and my God to Christ Jesus.

    The fact that it reads in such a way says one of the following:

    1. The Bible translators are inferring their own theology into the verse and making the English read to suit their beliefs.
    2. The Bible translators are lazy and just translated it almost word for word, one to one with the literal greek words.
    3. The Greek is indeed indicating that Thomas was addressing Jesus when he said, "My Lord and My God!"

    The Watchtower Society, I would think, would've been the most careful to ensure that this verse would've been translated appropriately to convey the message you assert is true. This is especially the case since their doing so would make it fit into their doctrine. Yet, the WT's own Bible also says in this verse, 'In answer Thomas said to him: “My Lord and my God!”' I would think that they would at least left the 'to him' part out to make it more appear that Thomas wasn't addressing anyone.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit