John 20:28, My Lord and My God

[Sparko]

The Greek here can be taken in more than one way.



The pertinent issue of exegesis at Titus 2:13 is whether Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ is in apposition to τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν or to τῆς δόξης τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν .


It's just not a "proof text." In fact the Trinitarian understanding here is contrary to the usual reading of τῆς δόξης in the GNT.

Every translation seems to disagree with you.

[Unitarian101]

Every translation seems to disagree with you.

That's not entirely true. Regardless, it's not a numbers game. Have you read Gordon Fee at Titus 2:13 ?

[Sparko]

That's not entirely true. Regardless, it's not a numbers game. Have you read Gordon Fee at Titus 2:13 ?

When nearly everyone since the beginning of Christianity disagrees with you it is relevant. I am sure you can cherry pick a few who agree with you, but that is all you are doing, cherry picking. Orthodox Christianity has been Trinitarian for 2000 years. Amazing how everyone missed what you and a few others have seen 2000 years later.

[Unitarian101]

When nearly everyone since the beginning of Christianity disagrees with you it is relevant. I am sure you can cherry pick a few who agree with you, but that is all you are doing, cherry picking.

Speaking of which : all of the apostles were Jews (Unitarians), and Jews did not (nor do they still) believe Jesus to be God, and nor do they sanction the "Trinity" doctrine (excepting documents like the Zohar, which do).

But the testimony of scripture is paramount: you do not have a single verse from the GNT where Jesus is indisputable called "God." That is very disturbing.

Orthodox Christianity has been Trinitarian for 2000 years. Amazing how everyone missed what you and a few others have seen 2000 years later.

More like 1600 years.

[Sparko]

Speaking of which : all of the apostles were Jews (Unitarians), and Jews did not (nor do they still) believe Jesus to be God or sanction the "Trinty" doctrine.

But the testimony of scripture is paramount: you do not have a single verse from the GNT where Jesus is indisputable called "God." That is very disturbing.

There are several. You just deny them. Which is what I expect from you. That's why I am not bothering to get into a deep debate about it. You aren't worth my time.

[Unitarian101]

There are several. You just deny them. Which is what I expect from you. That's why I am not bothering to get into a deep debate about it. You aren't worth my time.

None of them pass the smell text. Why don't we have a verse which says something like this:

"Jesus is the Almighty God" ?

This would shut me up permanently. Or this:

"The Father is Almighty God, the Son is Almighty God, the Holy Spirit is Almighty God; yet there are not three Almighty Gods but only one Almighty God."

Definitely will silence me for good.

[Sparko]

None of them pass the smell text. Why don't we have a verse which says something like this:

"Jesus is the Almighty God" ?

This would shut me up permanently. Or this:

"The Father is Almighty God, the Son is Almighty God, the Holy Spirit is Almighty God; yet there are not three Almighty Gods but only one Almighty God."

Definitely will silence me for good.

John 1:1-3 does spell it out. You hand wave it away. Colossians 1:15-17 also spells it out clearly. And I have already given you verses that directly call Jesus God. Yet you just dismiss them.

[Unitarian101]

John 1:1-3 does spell it out. You hand wave it away. Colossians 1:15-17 also spells it out clearly. And I have already given you verses that directly call Jesus God. Yet you just dismiss them.

[mikewhitney]

Ok. If the book just fell from the sky and you were the first person to find it, then you would be starting from unknown territory. You are assuming to start from a point of pure ignorance. But you don't have to start from that point. You have to assume that everything written in the first five centuries was in error. If you start from there, you better have an argument addressing all details concerning the Trinity. You can't just pick at the edges. This is what false teachers do. If you have a keen insight that has been missed, you have to show the conclusions and show the broad details of what was wrong before. I don't see this in your arguments yet. I think this has been part of your annual visits here. Maybe next year you will have more details to share.

I don't just apply this concept to your arguments. People offer new theories on pieces of Romans. Their arguments on these pieces sometimes make sense in a narrow context. But to be convincing, they need to describe the complete letter so that all the pieces fit together.

[Unitarian101]

[Sparko]

It calls the Word "God" - says he created everything. Then it says he was born of flesh. It goes on to tell the story of Jesus. You would have to be in complete denial to not see that it is saying Jesus is the Word who is God. Then Colossians 1 goes on to spell it out that Jesus is the Son who created everything and that everything holds together by his power. Who else would that be but God?

You are just confirming that actually debating this with you is a waste of time. You are being willfully ignorant.

[Same Hakeem]

It calls the Word "God" - says he created everything. Then it says he was born of flesh. It goes on to tell the story of Jesus. You would have to be in complete denial to not see that it is saying Jesus is the Word who is God. And if you are a complete moron, then Colossians 1 goes on to spell it out that Jesus is the Son who created everything and that everything holds together by his power. Who else would that be but God?

You are just confirming that actually debating this with you is a waste of time. You are being willfully ignorant.

Calling one GOD in the Bible does not such one God in nature. Many were called theos and elohim. For example, in Ps 82:6 God says to certain Jews "You are gods (elohim) and you are all sons of the Most High" and these Jews are not Gods.

[Unitarian101]

It calls the Word "God" - says he created everything. Then it says he was born of flesh. It goes on to tell the story of Jesus. You would have to be in complete denial to not see that it is saying Jesus is the Word who is God. Then Colossians 1 goes on to spell it out that Jesus is the Son who created everything and that everything holds together by his power. Who else would that be but God?

You are just confirming that actually debating this with you is a waste of time. You are being willfully ignorant.

The Word (a thing), not Jesus. It does not mention Jesus.

And the θεὸς in John 1:1c is not definite but indefinite , so it cannot be '"God" but should be "a divine" something (as in "a divine thing.")

[Unitarian101]

Calling one GOD in the Bible does not such one God in nature. Many were called theos and elohim. For example, in Ps 82:6 God says to certain Jews "You are gods (elohim) and you are all sons of the Most High" and these Jews are not Gods.

You are correct.

[Unitarian101]

The Trinitarian eisegesis at John 1:1 begins the minute they say the Logos (pre-flesh) here is Jesus. This is wrong and unscriptural. Rather the Logos made flesh (i.e. the Logos become a human being) is Jesus. Big difference. Look at John 1:14-17:

Καὶ ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετοἸησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐγένετο.