What is saving faith?

Faith is an allotment to a Chosen People

2 Pet 1:1

1Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:

Notice, peter specifies to them that have obtained like precious Faith ! This should be a signal to any hones heart that Faith is not given to or for everyone, and that its from a source outside of ourselves, for its precious, and comes from a precious source..

Notice that peter says it's obtained !!

This is important, and lets look at this word obtain. It is the greek word:

Arrangement Noun lagchanō= which means:

to obtain by lot

a) to receive by divine allotment, obtain

2) to cast lots, determine by lot

Notice, to receive by Divine Allotment..So what is a Allotment ?

Websters says this :

A share set aside for a specific purpose.

and its synonyms:

Arrangement

Noun: arrangement; plan; preparation; disposal, disposition

So Faith is obtained by arrangement, Plan, or disposal..

You remember what proverbs says about casting Lots and there disposal ?


Prov 16:33


The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD.


John Gill says of this verse:


" but the whole disposing thereof [is] of the Lord;

or "the judgment" of it; the judgment that is to be made by it concerning persons or things; it being so directed and ordered by him as to fall upon the person it should; or to make known the thing in doubt and debate according to his will, in which all parties concerned should acquiesce. This is to be ascribed, not to blind chance and fortune, to the influence of the stars, or to any invisible created being, angel or devil, but to the Lord only; there is no such thing as chance, or events by chance; those events which seem most fortuitous or contingent are all disposed, ordered, and governed, by the sovereign will of God. "


One receives faith by the Sovereign will of God according to His plan and purpose for them..


This reminds me of the High Priest..He is said to obtain His office Heb 8:6

But now hath he [Jesus Christ] obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

This is regarding His Priesthood, and if we are familiar with the OT Priest hood, of which His was so much better, nevertheless we find that the priesthood was not for everyone, but it was alloted to the tribe of levi..


Only those from that tribe could obtain[receive] to the priesthood of God..

It was alloted to that tribe in the Sovereign arrangement of things..

and so it is with Faith, its alloted to the heirs of salvation Heb 1:14

Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?


This Faith is Precious because it communicates Divine realities in the unseen Spiritual Heavenly world where Gods Throne rules, realties otherwise by nature we could never have or believe in..

 

To TrevorL: Here are some things you have said and a few questions/comments:

One part of the explaination of this is that Jesus actually "bore our sin" and "became sin for us" so that though he never sinned, he felt the full weight of sin upon himself. So in that sense, God is just to punish the sin that was on Jesus.

What exactly are you saying that "Jesus firstly accomplished" if it was not a substitutionary atonement?

It sounds as though jesus did not really need to come and die at all. What did his death actually accomplish if it was not to bear the wrath of God in our place?

 

Greetings 12strings,

I appreciate your questions. If you look at the recent posts you will find that I have 3 posts to answer to Dr. Walter, 1 to DHK, and now 1 to you. I have briefly come on line today and taken copies of all of these, but will not be able to respond for a few days due to other interests and commitments. I am going to listen to a talk on Isaiah 6 this afternoon by a speaker who I respect for his clarity and quality of exposition.

In general I feel at a loss to reduce my input for these answers required, and at the same time be clear and simple and especially true to what I believe.

So if DHK and Dr. Walter also read this, I hope you will be patient.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

Greetings again DHK,

The word “Elohim” in the OT is usually translated God, but also depending upon the context it can be translated judges and angels. I added this comment at the end of my post dealing with an explanation of John 10:30 Post #55:

This shows God the Father’s total involvement with the death of His Son. God as it were gave of Himself, he gave his only beloved Son.
Romans 5:8 (KJV): But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

I believe that Jesus was God manifest in the flesh. Jesus revealed God the Father. Jesus was full of grace and truth, a summary of the character of God revealed in Exodus 34. He was not God the Son.

I am not a Oneness Pentecostal. I do not know what they believe. My only contact with OPs was when I spoke to a mother and her two children many years ago, but they did not discuss this aspect of their belief. I believe that there is one God the Father, and that Jesus is God’s beloved Son as Matthew 3:17 above clearly states. The Holy Spirit, or the Spirit of God descended like a dove and came upon Jesus at his baptism. This clearly depicts that there is One God the Father, and that Jesus is the Son of God, and the Holy Spirit is God’s power.
Acts 10:38 (KJV): How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
Please also note the last phrase “God was with him”, and note how close this is to the meaning of the word Immanuel, and explains why Jesus can also be called Immanuel. Note also the two other usages of Immanuel in Isaiah 8.

Yes, God the Father is the Saviour by means of His Son. Hence the Name of Jesus: Yah’s Salvation. The Yahweh of the OT is God the Father in the NT. Jesus is the Son of God. The following clearly speaks of God the Father being the Saviour, but he uses the angel of his presence to effect the salvation:
Isaiah 63:8-9 (KJV): 8 For he said, Surely they are my people, children that will not lie: so he was their Saviour. 9 In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

Greetings again Dr. Walter,

I cannot accept your views expressed in your posts #58 (John 10:30-35, John 17), #59 Lord and Yahweh, #60 (John 1:1-14).

The following clearly speaks of God the Father being the Saviour, but he uses the angel of his presence to effect the salvation:
Isaiah 63:8-9 (KJV): 8 For he said, Surely they are my people, children that will not lie: so he was their Saviour. 9 In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old.
God the Father has set forth Jesus to be the object of personal faith, and when we bow the knee to Jesus it will be to the glory of God the Father. This is not idolatry.
Philippians 2:8-11 (KJV): 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Exodus 23:20-21 (KJV): 20 Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. 21 Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.

As well as the above clear declaration that the angel would bear God’s name, I believe that often when the word Elohim or Yahweh occurs in the OT, it is an angel speaking or acting on behalf of God the Father, that is Yahweh. This usage lays the basis for the NT.
Genesis 18:1 (KJV): And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;
Genesis 19:24 (KJV): Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;
This is not teaching two Yahwehs, but the angel with God’s name raining fire from Yahweh, God the Father.

Genesis 17:1 (KJV): And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.
Genesis 17:22 (KJV): And he left off talking with him, and God went up from Abraham.
This is an angel speaking on Yahweh’s behalf. At the close of his appearance the angel (Elohim) went up from Abraham, that is ascended back to heaven.

The appearance of Elohim to Moses in the burning bush in Exodus 3 was an angel, and Stephen in Acts 7 confirms this.

Zechariah 3:2 (KJV): And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?
Jude 9 (KJV): Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.
Jude interprets the first mention of Yahweh here as Michael the archangel.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

Greetings 12strings,

He certainly “bore our sin” and “became sin for us”, and he never sinned, and he felt the full weight of sin upon himself, pleading also on our behalf. I do not believe God punished Jesus, or was in any way angry with him. Jesus was God’s beloved son, in whom he was well pleased. Neither did God punish Joseph, Job and Paul. Why did they suffer?

Also Isaiah 53 is based upon the suffering of Hezekiah, his sickness, his healing, his extension of life, and the destruction of the Assyrian. God brought him through all these circumstances, not only to effect a partial salvation in his days, but to lay a pattern for God’s preeminent Suffering Servant, and the circumstances of Hezekiah’s life formed the framework of all of Isaaih’s Servant prophecies from Isaiah 40-53. We do not read of God’s anger against Hezekiah in these circumstances, but rather the preliminary fulfilment of the Servant Songs:
Isaiah 42:1-3 (KJV): 1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. 2 He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. 3 A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth.
Substitutionary atonement based upon the wrath of God does not match the above underlined.

He overcame sin by conquering it within himself. He never sinned so God raised from the dead, thus breaking the condemnation that was placed upon Adam which flowed to all his descendants. Jesus was descended from Adam through Mary. He will share this victory with those who believe into him, and part of this process is forgiving them their sins.

God was not angry with Jesus. By his victory he leads forth all those who are united with him by belief of the things concerning the name of Jesus Christ and the things concerning the Kingdom of God and are baptised into his death and resurrection Acts 8:5,12, Romans 6. His disciples or followers are forgiven their sins and will be resurrected and made immortal at the return of Jesus Acts 3:19-21, 1 Corinthians 15.
Hebrews 2:9-11 (KJV): 9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man. 10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. 11 For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,

Kind regards
Trevor

 

Remember basic facts here. The Gospel of John is in the New Testament, not the Old. The New Testament was written in Greek. The word Elohim has nothing to do with this discussion. It is a Hebrew word. The Greek word for God is Theos. And it cannot be translated as judges or angels, hence your argument goes down the drain. It is moot, useless.

Furthermore we are not discussing John 10:30 here. Your reply is supposed to be addressing Thomas's statement:

And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. (John 20:28)
kurios and theos. Lord and God. These are Greek words. This is the NT.
Thomas was addressing Jesus Christ as God, Theos, divinity, deity.

What was the reply:
Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. (John 20:29)
--Believe what? Believe that Christ was the Messiah, the Christ, God in the flesh.

 

Greetings again Dr. Walter,

I have considered the above verses except Isaiah 9:6, and some of these in more detail than others. Briefly on Isaiah 9:6, How do you understand the title “the mighty God”: have you checked the meaning in Hebrew? And the title “the everlasting Father”: how is Jesus the Father? I thought in your view of the Trinity that Jesus is God the Son, not God the Father.

What I wrote on these subjects is still the position I hold and believe. I was very surprised at your response to John 10:30-39 because I felt very confident that my explanation was simple and clear. I also had a few more verses on this subject where the judges are actually called “elohim” in Exodus, the basis of Psalm 82:6. This led to some discouragement and disappointment as it made me realise how difficult it is to come to a consensus when we have different mind-sets. When I think of the elements of the teaching concerning the Trinity my mind becomes confused, as I see so many conflicting ideas. My mind is at rest and encouraged in my understanding of the subject, which we have only looked at a small portion. I am also very interested in Exodus 3:14 and a number of other OT passages. Have you considered the margin of the RV and RSV that renders ehyeh as a future tense instead of “I AM”? Do you agree that this is a better translation?

Perhaps if you can unlock the following, I may be able to take that quantum leap that seems impossible at the moment. For an example of my confusion with the Trinity and perhaps our different mind-sets, consider the name Immanuel. I agree I did not explain Immanuel correctly in my post to DHK, but when I had quoted Acts 10:38, the phrase “and God was with him” struck me as having a kindred concept to or an echo of Immanuel.
Acts 10:38 (KJV): How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
Here we have the three “persons”, as Trinitarians claim, who make up the Trinity, that is if you accept that the first person mentioned here is God the Father. Please correct me here if I am wrong. I will add this in brackets to the following:
Do you believe that God (the Father) was with Jesus as stated in Acts 10:38? Is this when you make Jesus human and not Divine? How can God be with Jesus, when he is already God?
How can God (the Father) anoint Jesus with the Holy Spirit? Was Jesus lacking in some aspects of his Divinity?
Why does it say that God (the Father) anointed him with the Holy Spirit? Is the Holy Spirit unable to anoint Jesus without God (the Father)’s help?

What about the name Immanuel? Is this when you make Jesus Divine and not human?
Which part of the thinking of Jesus had to learn as a child, and at what age did the full Divine mind as inferred by the name Immanuel take over his thoughts? Did he as a babe have the full Divine mind? Was he able to instruct Mary at say two months old, and correct her on Scriptures, and give her wise advice?

You reject my inferences from these texts, and yet to my present belief these scriptures are the basis of the language of the NT, and also clarify much of the OT.

This shows the bias of your thinking. You do not allow the Word to be a personification, hence you ask: “who the preincarnate Word of God really is?” Have you considered some translations that use the word “it” to describe the Word in John 1:1-3, e.g. Tyndale’s translation. If you agree that this is valid, and you are the one claiming knowledge of Greek, would you be willing to rephrase your question: who or what the pre-incarnate Word of God really is? My answer: the WORD (logos) in John 1:1 is a personification.

I gave my explanation of John 1:1, that logos is parallel and draws its meaning from the usage of the woman personified as Wisdom in Proverbs 8. The heavens and earth were created by God’s wisdom and spoken word as Genesis 1 clearly teaches. If John wanted to say that in the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God and Jesus was God he would have done so. I am sure that this is virtually all that a Trinitarian reads when he looks at John 1:1.

The language of John 1:1, that is the personification of the Word, prepares the way for when the Word became personalised in the person of the Son of God, “the only begotten of the Father”.
John 1:14 (KJV): And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Do you attribute the glory of Jesus to the fact that he was begotten of the Father through Mary as Luke 1:35 clearly states. John in John 1:14 is drawing attention to that begettal, as the source of his glory, his being full of grace and truth. If Jesus somehow moved from Divinity to become a babe, why is the Father involved? And why was the power of the Holy Spirit also involved Luke 1:35? At what age did Jesus become “full of grace and truth”: at birth? Or at a later age? This question links to some extent with my question on Immanuel. It also links with Luke 1:35 that as a result of the begettal by the Father, the child would be holy, and he would be the Son of God. God is the Father, Jesus is the Son of God.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

Greetings again DHK,

I believe that those in the NT times used the word "Elohim" if they spoke in Hebrew in the same way as the OT. I also believe that John 10:30-35 is alluding and interpreting that usage. They did not use the word Elohim in the same way as we use God in English. We need to allow in translation the idiom of a language, and the general usage of the times which was based on that idiom.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

You can believe what you like but the fact is God inspired the NT in the Greek language. It has nothing to do with Hebrew. Greek was the universal language at the time. It was even commonly spoken among the Jews except perhaps in the Temple and synagogues. From Acts 6 we see that there was a dispute between the Grecian widows and those widows raised with a Hebrew background. As a common language Hebrew was fast fading as a spoken language.

The word theos was the common word for God, had nothing to do with the Hebrew word Elohim, and the Grecian Christians certainly wouldn't know any of that kind of connection even if there was. Your argument doesn't hold water. The NT was inspired in Greek. Theos is the word for God, and the word used for God whether our God or any other god.

However Thomas called him "My Lord and God," thus indicating the deity of Christ.

 

Greetings again Dr. Walter and DHK,

I appreciate both of your recent posts. I will hope to respond to them in a few days.

A few additional thoughts and references regarding John 10:35 and Psalm 82:6.
John 10:34-35 (KJV): "34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;"

The judges were called "gods" because they judged on God's behalf:
2 Chronicles 19:6 (KJV): "And said to the judges, Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for the LORD, who is with you in the judgment."
Deuteronomy 1:16-17 (KJV): "16 And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him. 17 Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God’s: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it."

Comparing the treatment of the word "elohim' in KJV and ASV usually translated "God", shows that the translators had difficulty with this word "elohim" when used for the judges. Christ's comment tells why they were called "gods", because "unto whom the word of God came". This is a unique Hebrew idiom, difficult to transfer into our language.
Exodus 22:8-9 (KJV): "8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges, to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour’s goods. 9 For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, which another challengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; and whom the judges shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour."
Exodus 22:8-9 (1901 ASV): "8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall come near unto God, to see whether he have not put his hand unto his neighbor’s goods. 9 For every matter of trespass, whether it be for ox, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, whereof one saith, This is it, the cause of both parties shall come before God; he whom God shall condemn shall pay double unto his neighbor."

Kind regards
Trevor

 

Greetings DHK,

I decided to answer your post while still online. I agree John's record was inspired in Greek. It is a record in this instance of what Thomas said to Jesus after his resurrection, and the complete removal of Thomas' doubts.

I cannot prove what language Thomas spoke, and I know that my interpretation cannot be proved absolutely, but on the other hand I suggest the same to you. Thomas could have used the same idiom found in John 10:35. I believe that the Jews were familiar with the Hebrew Scriptures, and with Hebrew. I do not think it was a completely dead language as yet. For example, when Paul was arrested he spoke to the crowd in Hebrew, and they kept the more silence.

Also the LXX usually translates Elohim by Theos. This does not wipe out the meaning of Elohim in the OT, but sometimes the idiom is obscured as suggested in my post above regarding the judges.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

1. 1. These are excellent verses on the deity of Christ that you can mull over.

 

Let's keep the discussion focused around Thomas's words and its context:

And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. (John 20:28)

1. This was a conversation in the lingo franca of the day. It is called koine Greek, the same language that God inspired the words of the NT, the universal language of the world, which Alexander the Greek brought with him when he conquered the world. Everyone spoke Greek.

2. To assume that the conversation was formerly in another language such as Hebrew or Aramaic is an argument from silence. It is the same argument that the RCC uses in Mat.13:55 in defense of the perpetual virginity of Mary. The Greek uses the word "adelphos" meaning "brothers" (of Jesus). They claim Matthew was first written in Aramaic, and the Aramaic word was originally the one for "cousin" not "brother." It is an argument from silence since we don't have any Aramaic MSS. You are making the same kind of argument as the RCC. We make our arguments from the MSS which we have, which are all in Greek.

3. This particular discussion has nothing to do with any Hebrew idioms. You must divorce all of those thoughts from your mind. It was a discussion between Jesus and Thomas, the other disciples also being present, in the upper room. Jesus appeared to them behind locked doors.

4. It was an absolute expression of worship and adoration in the language in which he would be most acquainted with, his mother tongue. That would have been koine Greek, the common language of the day--not the official language of the Hebrews, but rather the common language of the area.

The declaration of Thomas was simply that Christ was God, his God, but nevertheless God.

 

Greetings again Dr. Walter,

I appreciate your replies. Concerning Isaiah 9:6 you say the following:

I am interested in what you say here, but my present view is that Jesus is “the Mighty God”, in Hebrew EL Gibbor, the mighty warrior. Jesus is to fulfil the role of both Joshua and the angel who was in charge of God’s hosts in the conquest of Jericho. Jesus is the father of the coming age and beyond as the word “everlasting” here can be translated, in that all things will be created in and through him.

I am unsure if there is a strong link between Exodus 3:14 and John 8. John 8 is obscure, as it simply can be translated “I am he”, the same expression used by the blind man. It seems to be the wrong sequence to take a NT reference first before checking the OT word and context. If you insist that it is a direct link, then I still hold to the future tense in Exodus 3:14, which then finds its fulfilment in Jesus. To explain this in part the following may help.

You suggest that the future tense is wrong, but some advocate that the tense here is future, and with my limited Hebrew skills and resources this seems to be correct. It is the same as found only a few verses earlier:
Exodus 3:12 (KJV): And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain.

The question could arise if Exodus 3:14 is future, What will God be or become, or in other words what will he achieve? The following seems to link this meaning behind Yahweh with God’s promise to deliver Israel out of Egypt:
Exodus 6:1-8 (KJV): 1 Then the LORD said unto Moses, Now shalt thou see what I will do to Pharaoh: for with a strong hand shall he let them go, and with a strong hand shall he drive them out of his land. 2 And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD: 3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name YAHWEH was I not known to them. 4 And I have also established my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their pilgrimage, wherein they were strangers. 5 And I have also heard the groaning of the children of Israel, whom the Egyptians keep in bondage; and I have remembered my covenant. 6 Wherefore say unto the children of Israel, I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will rid you out of their bondage, and I will redeem you with a stretched out arm, and with great judgments: 7 And I will take you to me for a people, and I will be to you a God: and ye shall know that I am the LORD your God, which bringeth you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. 8 And I will bring you in unto the land, concerning the which I did swear to give it to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob; and I will give it you for an heritage: I am the LORD.

When the children were saved, having crossed the Red Sea, Moses sang a song in celebration of God’s victory:
Exodus 15:1-3 (KJV): 1 Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spake, saying, I will sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. 2 The LORD is my strength and song, and he is become my salvation: he is my God, and I will prepare him an habitation; my father’s God, and I will exalt him. 3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.
What was future when God revealed his Name to Moses at the bush, had become fulfilled in the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt. No longer could it be said that God would save Israel, but that Yahweh “is become my salvation”.

But this typical salvation of Israel pointed forward to the salvation that Jesus accomplished in his death and resurrection, and is yet to achieve when he returns to establish his kingdom.
Psalm 118:15-23 (KJV): 15 The voice of rejoicing and salvation is in the tabernacles of the righteous: the right hand of the LORD doeth valiantly. 16 The right hand of the LORD is exalted: the right hand of the LORD doeth valiantly. 17 I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the LORD. 18 The LORD hath chastened me sore: but he hath not given me over unto death. 19 Open to me the gates of righteousness: I will go into them, and I will praise the LORD: 20 This gate of the LORD, into which the righteous shall enter. 21 I will praise thee: for thou hast heard me, and art become my salvation. 22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner. 23 This is the LORD’S doing; it is marvellous in our eyes.
Isaiah 12:1-2 (KJV): 1 And in that day thou shalt say, O LORD, I will praise thee: though thou wast angry with me, thine anger is turned away, and thou comfortedst me. 2 Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the Yah Yahweh is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation.
The name Jesus also incorporates this idea, Yahoshua, He who will be Saviour. It enlarges the range of the meaning of Yahweh, from what God will achieve, to who He will become. Jesus is the incorporation of God’s name and purpose, to save his people from their sins.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

Greetings again DHK, I appreciate this reply and the extensive statements concerning the Trinity. I will look at this other post off line.

My only response to this is that if you look at when Paul was arrested he spoke to the guard in Greek, and this in a way surprised the guard. He expected him to speak in another language which was common in that day, I assume Aramaic. But then he addressed the crowd in Hebrew which the crowd seem to understand. Possibly because the scriptures were still read in the synagogues in Hebrew.

But I do not believe that Thomas spoke in Greek, and I assume that Jesus and the disciples conversed in Aramaic rather than Hebrew. Whether the Hebrew idiom was also present in the Aramaic I do not know. To claim that we must exclude the idiom because John translated Thomas' words into Greek is to me not valid. Any translation, and even in this case an inspired translation, loses some of the range of thoughts and ideas and words, even if that translation is the best possible, except for a repetitive paraphrase and explanation, which the NT does not in general provide.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

Here is the story you are referring to:

Who immediately took soldiers and centurions, and ran down unto them: and when they saw the chief captain and the soldiers, they left beating of Paul. Then the chief captain came near, and took him, and commanded him to be bound with two chains; and demanded who he was, and what he had done. And some cried one thing, some another, among the multitude: and when he could not know the certainty for the tumult, he commanded him to be carried into the castle. And when he came upon the stairs, so it was, that he was borne of the soldiers for the violence of the people. For the multitude of the people followed after, crying, Away with him. (Acts 21:32-36)
--Up to this point there was total confusion.
In this part of the land an educated person would be educated in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin, and possibly some of the local dialects. Paul knew all of these languages. Up to this point in the story Paul had said nothing. He was being beaten, and the mob was trying to kill him. If it weren't for the soldiers he would have been killed. Then what happens:

And as Paul was to be led into the castle, he said unto the chief captain, May I speak unto thee? Who said, Canst thou speak Greek? Art not thou that Egyptian, which before these days madest an uproar, and leddest out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers? But Paul said, I am a man which am a Jew of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city: and, I beseech thee, suffer me to speak unto the people. And when he had given him licence, Paul stood on the stairs, and beckoned with the hand unto the people. And when there was made a great silence, he spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying, (Acts 21:37-40)
--He speaks to the Captain in Greek (the universal language of the day), and the captain is surprised that he is educated enough to know Greek. Why? He thought he was an Egyptian, a criminal. Then Paul explains who he is. He asks permission to speak to the mob, almost exclusively Jews, and then he speaks to them in the Hebrew language.

Notice that they become very quiet when he speaks in Hebrew. They realize this is no criminal. They had a mob mentality. They had been aroused by their emotions to follow just a few men who had riled them up against an innocent man. Now they are listening to an orator--a very educated man who stands in his defense and gives them his testimony in their language. Hebrew is not the common language. The Captain and the guards sitting nearby probably don't have a clue what is being said. They don't know Hebrew. But the Jews have great respect for their mother language, the language which their "Bible", the OT is written in.

Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defence which I make now unto you. (And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence: and he saith,) (Acts 22:1-2)

For the next 20 verses he went through his testimony and referred to the martyrdom of Stephen. But then he said:

And he said unto me, Depart: for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles. And they gave him audience unto this word, and then lifted up their voices, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live. (Acts 22:21-22)

--And when he said, that God was sending him to the Gentiles they sought to kill him again. The uproar was on again.

The chief captain commanded him to be brought into the castle, and bade that he should be examined by scourging; that he might know wherefore they cried so against him. (Acts 22:24)
--The Captain understood Latin and Greek. He did not know what was wrong, and why everyone was angry. So he was going to scourge him. But he couldn't because Paul was a Roman citizen.

The common language was Greek. That is why it is called "koine Greek" or the common Greek. The Lord preserved the Word of God in that language, the language of the people. The disciples all spoke it fluently. It was the spoken language of the day. It would have been the language that they would have spoken in.

The only reason Paul spoke in Hebrew was to gain the crowd's attention; to show to them that he was different--a Jew who was educated. Paul always spoke in his own defense. He was his own lawyer. This time he used the tactic of language to gain the attention of the people, and it worked. But that is no evidence that Thomas spoke Hebrew to Christ. It is a conversation recorded in Greek. It was spoken in Greek. If you study the Gospel of John you will note that every time a word or phrase was first used in another language John indicates that it was in another language for the reader.
For example:

When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha. (John 19:13)

John gives no indication that this conversation was first in Hebrew, and we have no reason to believe that it was. Thomas spoke in Greek; it was recorded in Greek.
"My Lord and My God." It refers directly to the deity of Christ; that Christ is God.