 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Steven3
Lion King
Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 1205
Location: UK
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:02 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Hi Knuck | knuckle wrote: | Joh 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.
Greek is a bit well "greek" to me if you will explain the sentence structure here in relation to your above example. |
It's a little different because that sentence is (a) alternating the pronouns, (b) repeating the noun, (c ) emphasizing relation of two "owners", by possessive pronouns to one object. Like this:
20:17 Jesus (my) + disciples (your) ---> common Father
20:28 Thomas (my) ---> Jesus + God.
A similar sentence to John 20:17 would be "mi casa es su casa" (my house is your house) where casa (house) is repeated twice.
But what we'd be looking for in relation to 20:28 Thomas here is instead a sentence like:
Mi casa y mi oficina = two places.
Mi casa y oficina = one place.
meaning
My house and my office = two places
My house and office = one place.
Does that help any?
Steven |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6817
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| am I understanding that you are asserting that Thomas named Jesus as two people; Lord and God? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steven3
Lion King
Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 1205
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi RevJP | RevJP wrote: | | am I understanding that you are asserting that Thomas named Jesus as two people; Lord and God? |
I haven't yet got around to asserting anything, beyond the presence of two possessive pronouns meaning something. But if I do I am unlikely to assert anything like that. I was thinking more on the lines of the verses earlier in John where "he who sees me sees He that sent me".
God bless
S |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6817
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| So you are not recognizing that Thomas names Jesus as God. But you offer nothing linguistically or logically convincing that the reading of that passage means anything but what it says. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steven3
Lion King
Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 1205
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Rev | RevJP wrote: | | So you are not recognizing that Thomas names Jesus as God. But you offer nothing linguistically or logically convincing that the reading of that passage means anything but what it says. |
That's correct - I haven't offered an alternative explanation yet, at this point I'm just underlining what's there in the text.
God bless
S |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
apocatastasis
King of the Jungle
Joined: 15 Feb 2004
Posts: 1827
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steven3
Lion King
Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 1205
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 6:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Apoc | apocatastasis wrote: | |
Okay settle into your sofa.
Well, finally getting round to it, let it be put this way; I think maybe Thomas' comment is intended to be read with reference to his three previous appearances in John
1 - John 11:16 So Thomas, called the Twin, said to his fellow disciples, “Let us also go, that we may die with him.”
 expression of conviction that God could not raise Christ, nor them should they also die.
2 - John 14:5 Thomas said to him, “Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?”
no sign of understanding of what Christ is talking about, his own resurrection. More importantly, Thomas refused to do as Christ has just said in 14:1 “Let not your hearts be troubled. "Believe in God; believe also in me."2 In my Father's house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you? 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also. 4 And you know the way to where I am going.”
 This is the context to Thomas statement, again countered by 6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him.” ...........again God and Jesus. Know Jesus, then know God. "Believe in God; believe also in me."
3 - John 20:24 Now Thomas, one of the Twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe.”
conviction, absolute refusal to believe that God could have raised Jesus
Then, the 4th appearance of Thomas
John 20:26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” 27 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 disbelieve, but believe.” 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
Note that Christ's comment on belief refers back to his earlier conversation with Thomas: "Believe in God; believe also in me."Not believe in me as God.
ConclusionJohn 20:24
So I suggest we have 5 reasons for thinking that Thomas was expressing belief in his Lord "my Lord", and in his God "my God" as two persons "Believe in God; believe also in me." not as "my Lord-and-god"
{i.} grammar, the second "my".
{ii.} Christ's own comment on Thomas' comment, refering back to his own previous binary "Believe in God; believe also in me." statement to Thomas.
{iii.} John's immediately following statement on the purpose of his Book 20:30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. = two persons.
{iv.} the fact that Jesus is never called God elsewhere in the Bible.
{v.} the heavy emphasis by Peter on "God raised Jesus" in the first chapters of Acts.
So, Apoc, there you go. That's why I think the second "my" is there. To show that Thomas sees Christ raised and thinks of two persons :
"my lord" whom Thomas can see.
"my God" whom Thomas can't see, but whose existence and power is proved by having raised his Servant and Son Jesus from the grave.
This makes more sense to me than Thomas exclaiming "Jesus you are God", especially given what Jesus said to Thomas in Ch.14. "Believe in God; believe also in me."
Yes I realise that the vast majority of Christians will continue to read it as Thomas exclaiming "my lord you are my God", and that to think otherwise you must be a heretic, deviant, damaged and warped. But there you go.. 
God bless
Steven |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kejonn
Show Poodle
Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Posts: 251
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Steven3,
You try too hard sometimes to make use of English logic. Or any other logic it seems. I do not believe in the Trinity (for a multitude of reasons) but this thread is the wrong way to go about it. Lets look at your examples.
| Quote: | The king and emperor = 1 person
The king and the emperor = 2 people
My friend and teacher = 1 person
My friend and my teacher = 2 persons
My wife and my sister = 2 people
My wife and sister = 1 person (she's also baptised) |
Sounds good, but not entirely valid. I can say a woman is my girlfriend and my best friend but that would not split her into 2 people. By using "my" in each case I emphasize the value of each claim. But I would likely emphasize "and" in vocal inflection to do so. Since this is not probable in the Bible, we have to work with what we have.
Think about the theme of the Beloved Disciple's Gospel (I don't care what the scholars say, I am not convinced it is the Apostle John...too gnostic in flavor) tells us. Start with John 1 and "The Word". Now take a moment and look on biblegateway or blueletter and search for the phrase "word of the Lord" and read the verses associated with the results. What is the underlying theme? That the invisible God was known by His words. Yes, and also His creation, but then again, Genesis 1 has many instances of "And God said".
Now stop and think about people. We can see them, see their bodies and faces, and even their movements, but we never really know them until they speak to us. They reveal who they are through their words. These may be lies, but God never lies, so throw that thought out. Therefore, the God who cannot be seen, the invisible God must be known by His words.
"And the Word became flesh". This phrase sets the tempo for the rest of the Gospel of John. Yeshua is the revelation of God to man in a form we can finally see. Never before has a prophet spoken so well on behalf of God. But then again, no other man was the only begotten Son either.
Now, fast forward to Thomas after the resurrection. God had been fairly silent among the Israelites for some time. No prophets of real mention in some time. So Thomas only knew God through scripture. The Helper had not come yet. Thomas was spiritually blind with nothing but self-will to drive him. The one he thought was Messiah lay dead in a tomb. He saw him die, saw him cry out, saw the blood and water flow out of the hole in his side.
So when he saw the risen Yeshua face to face, the only true revelation of God he had ever really known, once dead and now alive, is it any wonder he cried out "My Lord and My God"?
Yet the story is not complete. Matthew,Mark, and Luke did not find this to be a noteworthy event. Peter and the Beloved Disciple called Yeshua "Lord" in the final chapter of John, but not "God". Peter had 3 opportunities to do so in his conversation with his Lord, but he never called him "God" -- he called him "Lord".
Perhaps we make too much out of the word "theos"? "theos" or "elohim" is not God's name. Both words were translated many different ways in OT and NT. Why do we want to latch so strongly to the use of these words to claim some triune God?
In ending, I am a Christian. I follow Christ. I do not follow Thomas -- I am not a Thomasian. Yeshua said
Jhn 20:17 Jesus said to her, "Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.' "
If the Lord of lords and King of kings said he has a God, and that God is my God, His Father and my Father, then I'll take his word over doubting Thomas any day.
How about you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steven3
Lion King
Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 1205
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Kejonn
Interesting. I sense that apart from your preference for the Yeshua name thing (not that it matters to me) we think very much alike. | kejonn wrote: | | Steven3, You try too hard sometimes to make use of English logic. Or any other logic it seems. |
Can't help it I'm afraid. I'm the sort of person who files their CDs by A-Z order.
In the case of grammar, which is what we're talking about here, you're absolutely right to say that you could say "my girlfriend and my best friend" and whether that was one person or two would indeed depend on emphasis and context. Particularly in English where hardly anyone bothers with grammar anyway. And you're right also that without vocal inflexion we lose much of the emphasis (if only we had a taped record!), though Greek, due to heavily inflected syntax, can contain more emphasis in written form than English.
I'm simply flagging the issue. All things being equal "my X and my Y" = two people, and "my X and Y" = 1 person.
That's all. It isn't a rule set into the foundations of Mount Horeb. It's simply an "all things being equal" base case.
It's more important, as you say to consider emphasis and context. And that's what I've tentatively tried to provide by showing the context of Jesus' previous conversation with Thomas in John 14 "believe in God, believe also in me", and the context of John's conclusion after Thomas' comment - "these things are written so you will believe in the Christ, the son of God."
But we're in a situation where most people are not going to consider Christ's previous conversation with Thomas, nor John's coda, have any relevance. Most people look at Thomas' verse (and it is a verse in isolation, with no chapter on either side) and read "Jesus you are my God".
That's not going to change. Thomas' statement is a key, if not the key, proof text that Jesus is God, so opening a door to look at it any other way is not going to be welcomed. So, that being the case, it won't hurt to flag the grammatical nicety that there's one "my" too many in Thomas' statement for it to be as black and white as people want.
| Quote: | Now, fast forward to Thomas after the resurrection. God had been fairly silent among the Israelites for some time. No prophets of real mention in some time. So Thomas only knew God through scripture. The Helper had not come yet. Thomas was spiritually blind with nothing but self-will to drive him. The one he thought was Messiah lay dead in a tomb. He saw him die, saw him cry out, saw the blood and water flow out of the hole in his side.
So when he saw the risen Yeshua face to face, the only true revelation of God he had ever really known, once dead and now alive, is it any wonder he cried out "My Lord and My God"? |
I actually have no problem with this. This is effectively what I was trying to say above, except that you've said it better than I did.
If when Philip saw the mortal Christ he should have seen the Father who sent him, then how much more should Thomas, beholding the raised immortalized Christ, now see the Father who raised him.
| Quote: | | Yet the story is not complete. Matthew,Mark, and Luke did not find this to be a noteworthy event. Peter and the Beloved Disciple called Yeshua "Lord" in the final chapter of John, but not "God". Peter had 3 opportunities to do so in his conversation with his Lord, but he never called him "God" -- he called him "Lord". |
Again. Agreed.
| Quote: | | Perhaps we make too much out of the word "theos"? "theos" or "elohim" is not God's name. Both words were translated many different ways in OT and NT. Why do we want to latch so strongly to the use of these words to claim some triune God? |
Yes, I used to think this. Mainly because Brown Driver Briggs and other Victorian reference works attest elohim to judges and angels. Unfortunately that only hangs on one verse, and a fragile one at that. But I'm absolutely not going to go there.
| Quote: | In ending, I am a Christian. I follow Christ. I do not follow Thomas -- I am not a Thomasian. Yeshua said
Jhn 20:17 Jesus said to her, "Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.' " |
Absolutely. Though I don't think you or I would see anything Thomas said as contradicting this. God is still the God of Jesus in Revelation, and indeed at the end of time 1Co15:24-28, so Thomas has to follow that, as do we.
God bless
S |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BMZ
Tadpole
Joined: 20 Apr 2007
Posts: 24
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 10:09 pm Post subject: Re: Why did Thomas use two "my"s? |
|
|
| Steven3 wrote: | John 20:28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!”
Why is the second "my" there? |
The answer is very simple. let us read the passage to get the context the right.
| Quote: | John 20: Jesus Appears to His Disciples
19On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 20After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord.
21Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you." 22And with that he breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven."
Jesus Appears to Thomas
24Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!"
But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."
26A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
28Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"
29Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
30Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31But these are written that you may[a] believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. |
Jesus did not ask Thomas this question: "Thomas, who do you say I am?" or "Thomas, who am I to you?" or "Thomas, who do you think I am?" or "Thomas, am I your Lord, the God or am I your Lord God?"
This was not the topic and there was no such question.
Thomas, the doubter had earlier expressed his disbelief that Jesus had appeared to and had met the disciples.
Thomas did not say,"Jesus, you are my Lord and my God."
Thomas merely exclaimed in astonishment, "My Lord and my God!", which he meant for the Lord Almighty God, not for Jesus. Any person would have done the same.
It simply meant,"oh! my God!!"
In verse 31 above, John kept the distinction clear by calling Jesus as the Son of God only. John was smart.
That is why John did not reprot and write, "My Lord God." Had Thomas said this, he would have then confirmed that Jesus was his Lord God.
The second "my" is to show that Thomas neither spoke those words for Jesus nor acknowledged him as his Lord God.
Hope this helped. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kejonn
Show Poodle
Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Posts: 251
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
BMZ,
Your approach is one I've seen in other places. I will agree that John closed out the 20th chapter with the following statement for a purpose:
John 20:31 but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.
I think that this summarizes the "why" of the Gospel of John. Again, the writer had the opportunity to repeat Thomas' exclamation to drive the "message" home, yet he did not. The writer gave us the essentials of who Yeshua is: the Christ, the Son of God.
But your approach is flawed by two words in John 20:28 - "to him". The Greek word "autos" is definitely in the verse, so there was no implied "to him" there. So the verse reads:
John 20:28 Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"
Had the writer left "autos" out of this verse, your view would be more valid. Yet Thomas spoke directly to Yeshua when he made the exclamation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steven3
Lion King
Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 1205
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 8:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
BMZ
Good and interesting post, and thanks, though on the "to him" Kejonn is quite right. The dative object AUTWi (to him) is not required by EIPEN (said), as it is an intransitive verb. It's presence there can therefore only be to emphasise that Thomas' statement was not merely an exclamation, it was directly said to Christ.
Again, sorry for the repeat, but I'd point back to Philip's failure to see the Father in the one he sent, as a parallel to Thomas's failure in the same chapter as Philip (in fact immediately before Philip's failure John 14:5,8), and both Thomas and Philip's John 14 answers are prefigured by:
| Quote: | John 12:44 “Whoever believes in me, believes not in me but in Him Who Sent Me.
45 And whoever sees me sees in Him Who Sent Me." |
This is the whole point of God having begotten a son by a daughter of Adam; that we mortal men and women would be able to look at that son and see the Father who sent him:
1 John 4:9 In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kejonn
Show Poodle
Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Posts: 251
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 8:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is just an "aside" for the Thomas account, but there are some out there in the Gnostic support camp that feel that the writer of John's Gospel purposely tried to make Thomas look bad. I don't necessarily support this view because it would detract from the validity of scripture but I do find something interesting in John 20 that relates directly to Thomas. Let's look at the context and make note.
Jhn 20:17 Jesus said to her, "Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.' "
Jhn 20:18 Mary Magdalene came, announcing to the disciples, "I have seen the Lord," and that He had said these things to her.
Jhn 20:19 So when it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and said to them, "Peace be with you."
Jhn 20:20 And when He had said this, He showed them both His hands and His side. The disciples then rejoiced when they saw the Lord.
Jhn 20:21 So Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you."
Jhn 20:22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
Jhn 20:23 "If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained."
Jhn 20:24 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
Jhn 20:25 So the other disciples were saying to him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe."
Now the context of these verses is that Yeshua told Mary to return and tell his brethren "I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God". And Mary Magdalene followed up on these orders in 20:18. As you read on, it appears that Thomas was not among the disciples because he did not make the statement that he would not believe that anyone had seen the Lord until verse 25. Had he been present when MM initially said she had seen the Lord, he would have said the same at this point. Therefore, he was not there to hear Mary repeat the phrase of Yeshua "I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God". So what happens? The infamous Thomas exclamation of John 20:28!
As I said, just a side item I find interesting when you note the context of John 20 . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
