Posts by Vidqun

35

the sounding of the trumpet

by enoughisenough in

i will risk showing my ignorance but i had some questioning thoughts in my head lately...maybe those more scholarly than me have insight.

jw teach that the anointed who now die go immediately to heaven.

when lazarus had died martha said she knew he would rise on the last day.

Vidqun

EasyPrompt, not that I want to belabor the issue, but 3 1/2 years = 42 months = 1,260 days. Not sure where your 1,150 days fit in (I understand now after seeing your chart).

In Revelation 3 1/2 years is connected to the public ministry of the two prophets, the trampling of the courtyard of the temple and the hiding of the woman from the dragon. Daniel connects it to the 3 1/2 years of harassment of God's people by the big horn. Last but not least, it its mentioned in connection with the breaking of the power of God's people.

Where do you read "Day of the LORD" or Armageddon is an instantaneous event? Did you read Zechariah 14? Everything will be "congealed," frozen. No sunrise or sunset. One day, however long it takes.

And to repeat, the creative days of Genesis 1 are completely unconnected to Daniel's 2,300 evening-morning time scale. Not sure how you connect the two.

I am also not sure how you connect the resurrection with the end of 1,260 days. Perhaps you can explain that to me.

7 trumpet blasts (first half). 7 plagues (second half). So 5 months would occur in the days of the fifth trumpet. Locust-scorpions will torment all, not only the religious folk. Babylon will only be destroyed at the end of the tribulation (in the days of the 7th plague).

I have a problem with 2,300 until the holy place is brought into its right condition. That will only be after Armageddon (cf. Dan. 12:7 and the second half of the tribulation IMHO)..

I agree with the 1,290 days.

I see your 1,290 and 1,335 days overlap. Is there a basis for that? Only hope for your shortened version of the great tribulation is if the days were cut short.

14

"Outside the realms" of the words meaning?

by Blotty in

i was recently doing some research and came across this curious quite from dr beduhn - i can't say how valid it is or if he actually said it (source linked).

but this got me thinking i don't think there is anything in any bible where it is a "deliberate" distortion or the words go against the "possible range of meanings the greek" could have.

i know beduhn is not considered an authority however he does have a point - if its in the range of meanings it is by no means a mistranslation & cannot be pointed out as such.

Vidqun

PetrW, here's a few alternative translations, proving the veracity of Prof. BeDuhn's words. Don't think any of these translators had any contact with JWs, yet they translate it the same as the NWT.

Example 1: (and persons, coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people. (Matt. 27:53 NWT)

(They came out of the tombs after his resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.) (Matt. 27:53 NET)

Example 2: and everyone that is living and exercises faith in me will never die at all. (Jn. 11:26 NWT)

Everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die-- ever. (Jn. 11:26 CSB)

Everyone who lives in me and believes in me will never ever die. (Jn. 11:26 NLT)

Example 3: (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. (Rev. 20:5 NWT)

(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were finished.) This is the first resurrection. (Rev. 20:5 NET)

(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were over.) This is the first resurrection. (Rev. 20:5 CJB)

(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. (Rev. 20:5 NIB)

(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. (Rev. 20:5 NIV)

35

the sounding of the trumpet

by enoughisenough in

i will risk showing my ignorance but i had some questioning thoughts in my head lately...maybe those more scholarly than me have insight.

jw teach that the anointed who now die go immediately to heaven.

when lazarus had died martha said she knew he would rise on the last day.

Vidqun

EasyPrompt, here's my version of the timeline for what it's worth. Two witnesses will start their public ministry after the 6th trumpet blast according to Revelation chronology. Their ministry would last 3 1/2 years, ending with the onset of the 5th plague. The first resurrection would then take place in the days of the 7th trumpet. Half of the tribulation: 3 1/2 years. The second resurrection would start after Armageddon (cf. Dan. 12:13).

1) Sum total: Great Tribulation + Battle of Armageddon: 1,290 days + 1,335 days = 2,625 days

Day of the LORD: 2,625 days - 2,520 days = 105 days or 3½ months. The full duration of the LORD’s Day is therefore 105 days or 3½ months (from the end of the Tribulation to Armageddon). Only after 2,625 days had run their course, would the surviving observers be declared happy (Dan. 12:11-13; cf. Rev. 7:9, 14). The last chapter of Daniel and the activities of the King of the North here should be seen within the context of the Great Tribulation (Dan. 11:40-12:1, 4, 7, 10).

2) 360 days + 1,260 days + 105 days = 1,725 days

Evening-morning: 1) The two nouns are singular. 2) Lit. an “evening-morning” time unit (not time, year or day), resulting in a most unusual time scale. 3) Evening in Hebrew means when the sun goes down. Morning means first light, when the sun comes up, until midday when the sun is at its zenith. Afternoon, when the day starts to fade, is not part of the equation. 4) One evening-morning is therefore 18/24 hours = ¾ of a day. 2300 evening-morning x ¾ = 1725 days. This literal interpretation does not necessarily deviate from Hebrew usage (Dan. 8:14, 26; cf. Ex. 16:8-13; 1 Kings 17:6).

Day of the LORD: 1,725 days - (1,260 days + 360 days) = 105 days or 3½ months. In other words, 1,725 days - (360 days + 105 days) = 1,260 days of the second half of the Tribulation (Dan. 8:13, 14). I believe the duration of the Tribulation to be 7 years or 2520 days. The length of both trumpet blast and plague would then be in the vicinity of 180 days each, provided plague and trumpet blast are of the same length (180 days x 14 trumpet blasts/plagues = 2520 days). King of the South as part of Beast from the abyss will only start launching attacks on God’s people and the two prophets after the sixth trumpet blast (Dan. 7:25; 8:11-14; 11:40; cf. Rev. 9:4, 12, 13; 11:2-8, 14, 15). Trumpet blast 6&7: 180 days x 2 = 360 days.

3) The LORD’s Day: Jehovah’s Day = 105 days or 3½ months (without sunrise or sunset) = 1 “day.” See Zech. 14:1, 6, 7.

14

"Outside the realms" of the words meaning?

by Blotty in

i was recently doing some research and came across this curious quite from dr beduhn - i can't say how valid it is or if he actually said it (source linked).

but this got me thinking i don't think there is anything in any bible where it is a "deliberate" distortion or the words go against the "possible range of meanings the greek" could have.

i know beduhn is not considered an authority however he does have a point - if its in the range of meanings it is by no means a mistranslation & cannot be pointed out as such.

Vidqun

b. reverence, respect

α. toward God (Polyaenus 1, 16, 1; LXX; PsSol 6:5 al.; EpArist 159 ὁ περὶ θεοῦ φόβος; 189; cp. φόβος τὰ θεῖα τοῖσι σώφροσιν βροτῶν TGF, Adesp. no. 356 p. 906) and Christ, w. τρόμος Phil 2:12 (s. τρόμος). W. ἀλήθεια 1 Cl 19:1; Pol 2:1. W. ἀγάπη 1 Cl 51:2. W. εὐλάβεια Pol 6:3. W. πίστις, εἰρήνη and other good things and virtues 1 Cl 64. W. ὑπομονή B 2:2. W. ἐλπὶς: εἰς τὸν Ἰησοῦν 11:11. W. πίστις and ἐγκράτεια Hm 6, 1, 1. W. objective gen. φόβος (τοῦ) θεοῦ (PLond 1914, 12 φόβον θεοῦ ἔχοντες ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ; Philo, Spec. Leg. 4, 199; TestLevi 13:7; TestNapht 2:9; Theoph. Ant. 1, 7 [p. 72, 26]) Ro 3:18 (Ps 35:2); 2 Cor 7:1 (ἀγάπη P46); 1 Cl 3:4; 21:6; cp. 8; B 4:11; 19:5; 20:2; Pol 4:2; Hm 10, 1, 6a; 12, 2, 4bc; D 4:9. φόβος (τοῦ) κυρίου (TestReub 4:1; TestSim 3:4) Ac 9:31; 1 Cl 22:1 (Ps 33:12); 57:5 (Pr 1:29); B 11:5 (Is 33:18 v.l.); Hm 7:4b; 8:9; 10, 1, 6b; 12, 2, 4a; 12, 3, 1. Some place here 2 Cor 5:11 (s. 1b above). φόβος Χριστοῦ Eph 5:21.—For 1 Pt 1:17 s. 2aα beg.

β. toward humans, respect that is due officials (cp. Byzantinische Papyri [Munich], ed. AHeisenberg/LWenger, 1914, no. 2, ln. 13 p. 43: ἔχοντες τὸν φόβον … τῆς ὑμετέρας ἐνδόξου ὑπεροχῆς=having respect for your esteemed authority) Ro 13:7ab (CCranfield, NTS 6, ’60, 241-49: the ref. may be to God); fr. slave to master 1 Pt 2:18; Eph 6:5 (w. τρόμος); B 19:7=D 4:11 (w. αἰσχύνη); wife to husband 1 Pt 3:2 (cp. SEG XXXV, 1427, 5 [III AD]). Gener. 3:16 (w. πραΰτης).—WLütgert, Die Furcht Gottes: MKähler Festschr. 1905, SBerkelbach v.der Sprenkel, Vrees en Religie 1920, 165ff; RSander, Furcht u. Liebe im palästin. Judentum ’35.—B. 1153. DELG s.v. φέβομαι I. M-M. EDNT. TW. Sv.

William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 1062.

72

Romans 9:5

by aqwsed12345 in

na28: ὧν οἱ πατέρες καὶ ἐξ ὧν ὁ χριστὸς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα, ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν.. na28 transliterated: hō̃n hoi patéres kaì ex hō̃n ho khristòs tò katà sárka, ho ṑn epì pántōn theòs eulogētòs eis toùs aiō̃nas, amḗn.. kit: .

nwt: to them the forefathers belong, and from them the christ descended according to the flesh.

god, who is over all, be praised forever.

Vidqun

נֶפֶשׁ, meaning of nephesh:

1. throat

2. neck

3. breath

4. living being

5. people

6. personality

7. life

8. soul as the centre and transmitter of feelings and perceptions

9. dead soul – deceased person, corpse. See HALOT.

ψυχή, (‘life, soul’) It is oft. impossible to draw hard and fast lines in the use of this multivalent word. Gen. it is used in ref. to dematerialized existence or being, but, apart fr. other data, the fact that ψ. is also a dog’s name suggests that the primary component is not metaphysical, s. SLonsdale, Greece and Rome 26, ’79, 146-59. Without ψ. a being, whether human or animal, consists merely of flesh and bones and without functioning capability. Speculations and views respecting the fortunes of ψ. and its relation to the body find varied expression in our lit.

1.life on earth in its animating aspect making bodily function possible

a. (breath of) life, life-principle, soul, of animals and humans.

b. the condition of being alive, earthly life, life itself.

c.by metonymy, that which possesses life/soul

2.seat and center of the inner human life in its many and varied aspects, soul.

3. an entity w. personhood, person. See BDAG.

Some Lexicon nuances on the noun “nephesh” and “psyche,” not so broad at all. That’s one of the reasons why I avoid theology books if I can help it. Lots of personal opinions in there. I rather find out for myself. By the way, the first Christians were Jews, so they would have adapted Greek terminology to their worldview as contained in the Hebrew-Aramaic Scriptures. I can see why theologians do not like Ezek. 18:4ff. Doesn’t fit their theology at all. Sounds like the new generation theology of the Watchtower. To fit our theology, we change the meaning of the word. Same with gene therapy vs. vaccine. Change the definition for marketing purposes. The following makes it clear, you love God with everything you’ve got.

And he said to him, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. (Matt. 22:37 ESV)

Sheol: Wasteland, void, underworld. Realm of the dead. See HALOT.

Hades: Orig. proper noun, god of the nether world, ‘Hades’, then the nether world, Hades as place of the dead. See BDAG. Obviously the Septuagint translators had to find equivalents and that’s as close as it gets.

The burden of proof is on you, since if you look at the commentaries, Christian and Jewish exegetes almost unanimously interpreted it as I wrote. By the way, logic also supports this, since angels are pure spirits who are able to appear visibly (with God's permission), but this is only apparent, they cannot concieve children.

You speak of the burden of proof. I don’t find it in your next statement. I don’t see the logic either, especially when it contradicts the Scriptures. Pure spirits with the ability to take on a human form (cf. Gen. 18:1ff.). These were angels in human form, able to eat and drink. This ability was taken away from the fallen angels (demons), which makes sense. That's why it became necessary for them to invade and occupy human or animal hosts.

72

Romans 9:5

by aqwsed12345 in

na28: ὧν οἱ πατέρες καὶ ἐξ ὧν ὁ χριστὸς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα, ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν.. na28 transliterated: hō̃n hoi patéres kaì ex hō̃n ho khristòs tò katà sárka, ho ṑn epì pántōn theòs eulogētòs eis toùs aiō̃nas, amḗn.. kit: .

nwt: to them the forefathers belong, and from them the christ descended according to the flesh.

god, who is over all, be praised forever.

Vidqun

Aqwsed, as you might have noticed, I interpret the Scriptures quite literally. On the one hand, I view the soul as a living person (or animal). Adam became a living soul when he started breathing (Gen. 2:7). Animals are called living souls (Gen. 1:21). The Bible also refers to a dead soul (Lev. 21:11). The spirit is the life force of that person. When a person dies, the spirit is returned to God (Ecc. 12:7).

On the other hand,

God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth." (John 4:24)

17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.

18 And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit. (2 Cor. 3:17-18 ESV)

Thus it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. (1 Cor. 15:45)

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, (1 Pet. 3:18 ESV)

To me it’s quite simple. Like Father, like Son.

there is not a single mention of the fact that this would mean the destruction of Jesus' body and the cessation of being a human.

For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. (Heb. 9:16 ESV). [ For where there is a covenant, the death of the [human] covenanter needs to be furnished. (Heb. 9:16 NWT) ]

When Jesus therefore had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And He bowed His head, and gave up His spirit. (John 19:30).

Why did he say that? He did what was expected of him. Because he was about to fully accomplish God’s will and fulfill his ministry and prophecy: “to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place. (Dan. 9:24 ESV)

In my mind the word “sacrifice” means the death of the victim. There is no other way (cf. Ex. 12:21). And is that not what the memorial is all about, the sacrifice of Jesus' body and blood?

26 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is my body."

27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, all of you,

28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. (Matt. 26:26-28 ESV)

And the fact that nobody recognized the resurrected Jesus, is also an indication that he rose with a different body. After examining the evidence, the argument of your apologists is unconvincing.

"See references to "Sons of God" .." - At most, your references prove that "sons of God" can mean angels, but they do not prove that it also actually means angels in Genesis 6:2.

It does not disprove it either. So where do the violent Nephilim ("giants"), "the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown" fit in then? (Gen. 6:4 ESV)

13

Martin Armstrong's latest book, 'The Plot to Seize Russia'

by was a new boy in

the 2015 documentary - 'the forecaster' was basically banned in usa.

so martin leased a movie theater in cherry hill nj and showed it himself.. 'a german tv station funded the 2015 documentary on me entitled the forecaster.

because it raised some of these issues back then, the film was banned in the united states as well as switzerland...'.

Vidqun

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/wikipedia-co-founder-describes-us-intelligence-manipulation-worlds-largest-online

Interesting topic. Yes, Wikipedia is completely compromised. And Putin did warn that if the existence of Russia or the Russian way of life are threatened, he will respond with nuclear weapons. These US neocons, wanting to take down Putin and Russia, are lunatics. They should all be kept in an lunatic asylum. Even better, they should be put out of their misery on a permanent basis. And as an example of uneven judgment by a DoJ run by neocons: Trump and Julian Assange vs. Biden crime family.

72

Romans 9:5

by aqwsed12345 in

na28: ὧν οἱ πατέρες καὶ ἐξ ὧν ὁ χριστὸς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα, ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν.. na28 transliterated: hō̃n hoi patéres kaì ex hō̃n ho khristòs tò katà sárka, ho ṑn epì pántōn theòs eulogētòs eis toùs aiō̃nas, amḗn.. kit: .

nwt: to them the forefathers belong, and from them the christ descended according to the flesh.

god, who is over all, be praised forever.

Vidqun

Aqwsed, here's a few thoughts to contemplate. No man (human) can see God and survive (Ex. 33:20; Deut. 10:10; John 1:18; 6:46; 1 John 4:12).

Sign of son of man (spirit is invisible), so a sign is needed: Matt. 24:30

To confirm: “Thus it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit.” (1 Cor. 15:45 ESV)

"and to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect," (Heb. 12:23 ESV)

The argumentation of Paul in 1 Cor. 15:37ff. is quite clear. This is figurative language. E.g., "seed" and "body." And as discussed earlier, "son of man" is a self-designated title.

John 2:19-22 clearly means the resurrection of Jesus' body to life, not his re-creation as a spirit. And if he rose with his body, he also ascended with it. And this does not merely prove that His real body will be resurrected, but also that also He will do it as well. How else could he say a parable about rebuilding (which cannot be a passive role) the temple himself?
“Touch me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have” (Luke 24:39).

This cannot be the same body that he died with. Jesus had to offer up his original body as sacrifice which he cannot take back (Hebr. 2:17; 9:26; 10:10).

1 Peter 3:18 - "but made alive in the Spirit." - This does not mean that he became an angel (spirit), but that he was resurrected by the (Holy) Spirit. The preposition "in" is often understood in the sense of "by" (cf. "all things were created in him", Col 1:16) He was raised "in the Spirit", but not "as a spirit." In Romans 8:9 all the believers in Rome are said to be "in the Spirit." Were they spirit creatures? The expression "in the Spirit" simply means "in the power of the [Holy] Spirit." First Peter 3:18 demonstrates that the Holy Spirit raised Jesus from the dead and quickened him.

You are misreading what was said. You left out an important phrase: “in the flesh,” and “in the spirit.” You want it to read “in the flesh” but “by the spirit.” Why?

"Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God" (1 Corinthians 15:50).

The expression "flesh and blood" occurs only five times in the New Testament. We must derive our definition of its meaning from these occurrences. Webster's Dictionary is of no use here. Examine the following references and see if the writers are not just as often speaking of "flesh and blood" as being "fallen man" as they are of the physical body. You might try substituting the words "fallen man" in the place of "flesh and blood."

Dictionary definition does not agree with your definition of "fallen man":

The material that covers the bones of a human or animal body, flesh lit. 1 Cor 15:39abcd; Hv 3, 10, 4; 3, 12, 1. The pl. (which denotes flesh in the mass. For Mt 16:17; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12; and 1 Cor 15:50.

1. The physical body as functioning entity, body, physical body

a. as substance and living entity

b. as something with physical limitations, life here on earth

c. as instrument of various actions or expressions.

of human beings in contrast to lit. blood as basic component of an organism, blood

a. of human beings in contrast to gods: (αἷμα καὶ σάρκας ἔχοντες

of souls σαρκὶ καὶ αἵμ. βεβαπτισμέναι) Mt 16:17; 1 Cor 15:50; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12. See BDAG.

Genesis 6:2 - here the "sons of God" are not angels, but pious people, men of the tribe of Seth, the Setites, and by "daughters of men" we must mean the daughters of the tribe of Cain. Angels cannot concieve children, as some superstitions believed in the Middle Ages, since they are pure spirits. If, therefore, the angels appear in visible form (angelophaniae) according to the presentation of the Scriptures, this body of theirs is only apparent.

See references to "Sons of God" in OT: Job 38:7; Ps. 86:6; cf. Job 1:6. These are angels with the ability to materialize as humans. Lots of Biblical examples of that.

72

Romans 9:5

by aqwsed12345 in

na28: ὧν οἱ πατέρες καὶ ἐξ ὧν ὁ χριστὸς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα, ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν.. na28 transliterated: hō̃n hoi patéres kaì ex hō̃n ho khristòs tò katà sárka, ho ṑn epì pántōn theòs eulogētòs eis toùs aiō̃nas, amḗn.. kit: .

nwt: to them the forefathers belong, and from them the christ descended according to the flesh.

god, who is over all, be praised forever.

Vidqun

"Because Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, to bring you to God, by being put to death in the flesh but by being made alive in the spirit." (1 Pet. 3:18 NET)

Spirit beings have the ability to take on a human form (cf. Gen. 19:1; 28:1). This ability was taken away from the disobedient angels (Gen. 6:2; cf. 2 Pet. 2:4). So, your "man" is Jesus Christ. He can take on a human form at any time. And he can also be referred to as a "man" or "son of man" because he did spend time on earth as a man. In addition, blood and flesh cannot inherit the kingdom (1Cor 15:44, 50).

72

Romans 9:5

by aqwsed12345 in

na28: ὧν οἱ πατέρες καὶ ἐξ ὧν ὁ χριστὸς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα, ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν.. na28 transliterated: hō̃n hoi patéres kaì ex hō̃n ho khristòs tò katà sárka, ho ṑn epì pántōn theòs eulogētòs eis toùs aiō̃nas, amḗn.. kit: .

nwt: to them the forefathers belong, and from them the christ descended according to the flesh.

god, who is over all, be praised forever.

Vidqun

Aqwsed, unfortunately Rom. 9:5 is not as clear cut as you make out. You have given one side of the argument, so I won't go into it. Grammar, Paul's theology and scribal error should all be weighed up for each to come to his own conclusion. The following is Rom. 9:5. Footnote 1 in Metzger's commentary:

Among many earlier discussions pro and con, two may be singled out for special mention as representative of the two points of view. In favor of taking the words as an ascription to Christ, see William Sanday and A. C. Headlam, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, 2nd ed. (New York, 1896), pp. 233–238; in favor of taking the words separately from the preceding clause, see Ezra Abbot, “On the Construction of Romans ix.5,” Journal of the Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, 1881, pp. 87–154, and idem, “Recent Discussions of Romans ix.5,” ibid., 1883, pp. 90–112 (both articles are reprinted in Abbot’s posthumously published volume entitled, The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel and Other Critical Essays [Boston, 1888], pp. 332–410, and 411–438). For a more recent discussion, see the present writer’s contribution to Christ and Spirit in the New Testament; Studies in honour of C. F. D. Moule, ed. by Barnabas Lindars and Stephen S. Smalley (Cambridge University Press, 1973), pp. 95–112; reprinted in Metzger’s New Testament Studies (Leiden, 1980), pp. 56–74.

On the other hand, in the opinion of others of the Committee, none of these considerations seemed to be decisive, particularly since nowhere else in his genuine epistles does Paul ever designate ὁ Χριστός as θεός. In fact, on the basis of the general tenor of his theology it was considered tantamount to impossible that Paul would have expressed Christ’s greatness by calling him God blessed for ever.

Bruce Manning Metzger, United Bible Societies, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition a Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament (4th Rev. Ed.) (London; New York: United Bible Societies, 1994), 459–462.

On the other hand, Paul nowhere else in his genuine epistles (that is, the letters which scholars agree were written by Paul; Titus 2:13 is generally regarded as not written by Paul) ever designates ὁ Χριστὸς as θεός. On the basis of the general perspective of Paul’s theology, it is difficult to think that Paul would have expressed Christ’s greatness by calling him God blessed for ever.

It is also possible that a copyist accidentally wrote ὁ ὥν (the one being) for ὧν ὁ (of whom). That is, the original text may have read “4 … of whom the sonship (ὧν ἡ υἱοθεσία), the glory … 5 of whom the patriarchs (ὧν οἱ πατέρες), and from whom (ἐξ ὧν) the Messiah according to the flesh, of whom God over all (ὧν ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων θεός).…” This punctuation “would make Paul assert that Christ by natural descent is a prerogative of Israel, but that God is the one who is preeminent and blest forever, in effect, Israel’s ninth prerogative” (Fitzmyer, p. 549). It should be noted, however, that there is no evidence in the manuscripts to support such a correction of the text.

Roger L. Omanson and Bruce Manning Metzger, A Textual Guide to the Greek New Testament: An Adaptation of Bruce M. Metzger’s Textual Commentary for the Needs of Translators (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2006), 308–310.