The problem is that the Greek Grammar and construction makes it very clear that John was stating that Jesus was God, same as the father, but not the father!
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Philippians 2:6
- Thread starter SATS PROF
- Start date
- Status
Also, there would be that pesky "My Lord and my God" saying...
I don't disagree. But, tell that to the Jehovah's Witnesses. And, I've tried explaining it to those on that particular blog, mostly to no avail.
And they have a response to that, as well.
None though that address the biblical Greek text!
The problem is that there are NO reputable greek scholars that would agree with them that John called jesus a god, and not God!
I don't disagree with you, per se; but, can you tell me how would defend it?
Ask them if they believe in Isaiah, as he stated that God knows of no other Saviour, and yet NT calls Jesus saviour....
I mean from the Greek grammar.
Hit them with the Granville sharp rule, as to when peter called Jesus our great God and our Saviour!
I used to get a lot of JWs at my door on Saturday morning. I always kept my Greek New Testament on a shelf next to the door. As we talked I would steer the discussion around to the Deity of Christ and quote John 1:1. They always took the bait and told me the lack of the definite article required the English to read "a god."
So I would ask them of they had studied Greek to which they always replied, "Yes."
So I would open my Greek NT to John 1:1 and hand it to them and ask them to point out the words in question. They never could. So I would reach over and say, "Well, your first problem is that you are holding it upside down." Then I would tell them they had not been truthful with me, had they?
By this time they were ready to leave, but I would always show them that even though, yes, there was no definite article, the word order was different than the first clauses and actually reads "And God was the Word." The word for "God" was in the emphatic position so it would be legitimate to translate the last clause as "And the Word was emphatically God."
As they usually went two by two, a teacher and a student, by this time the teacher has the student by the arm and is dragging him off my porch.
But they are deeply immersed in their false religion. In 43 years of ministry I only saw one JW come to Christ.
I thought you might invoke that. Unfortunately, it doesn't apply to John 20:28. The article is used before both nouns (it's article-noun-(pronoun)-kai-article-noun), which, if we used Sharp, would indicate two separate entities. Again, I don't disagree with you on the Christological significance of this passage; but, their comeback was that this passage is: "My Lord" (Jesus) and "My God" (the Father).
I used to get a lot of JWs at my door on Saturday morning. I always kept my Greek New Testament on a shelf next to the door. As we talked I would steer the discussion around to the Deity of Christ and quote John 1:1. They always took the bait and told me the lack of the definite article required the English to read "a god."
So I would ask them of they had studied Greek to which they always replied, "Yes."
So I would open my Greek NT to John 1:1 and hand it to them and ask them to point out the words in question. They never could. So I would reach over and say, "Well, your first problem is that you are holding it upside down." Then I would tell them they had not been truthful with me, had they?
By this time they were ready to leave, but I would always show them that even though, yes, there was no definite article, the word order was different than the first clauses and actually reads "And God was the Word." The word for "God" was in the emphatic position so it would be legitimate to translate the last clause as "And the Word was emphatically God."
As they usually went two by two, a teacher and a student, by this time the teacher has the student by the arm and is dragging him off my porch.
But they are deeply immersed in their false religion. In 43 years of ministry I only saw one JW come to Christ.
I had something similar happen to me, though, at the time, I was less prepared. They told me they would talk with some others at their church and get back with me. I didn't see them again.
When paul called jesus the Lord, was he not invoking the LORD as in the OT then, and not just a title for say a ruler/king?
I have talked with scores of JW's and have only had one leave the assembly (actually, he was disassociated or some such thing).
HankD
With all due respect, I'm in general agreement with you, but my intent is to exegete and argue from the Greek. Their counter to your position would be that John doesn't necessarily rely on Paul. This is why we have to argue from the Greek of the particular context. Otherwise, it becomes an endless battle of words back and forth. Unfortunately, John 20:28 is not a slam dunk for the position of Jesus as Deity. Again, to reiterate: I don't disagree, and I'm a Trinitarian.
the JW loved to quote professor Mantey, as one who supports them stating jesus was a god, but he wrote a really critical review on them and their Watchtower version, and did NOT agree with them on jesus at all!I used to get a lot of JWs at my door on Saturday morning. I always kept my Greek New Testament on a shelf next to the door. As we talked I would steer the discussion around to the Deity of Christ and quote John 1:1. They always took the bait and told me the lack of the definite article required the English to read "a god."
So I would ask them of they had studied Greek to which they always replied, "Yes."
So I would open my Greek NT to John 1:1 and hand it to them and ask them to point out the words in question. They never could. So I would reach over and say, "Well, your first problem is that you are holding it upside down." Then I would tell them they had not been truthful with me, had they?
By this time they were ready to leave, but I would always show them that even though, yes, there was no definite article, the word order was different than the first clauses and actually reads "And God was the Word." The word for "God" was in the emphatic position so it would be legitimate to translate the last clause as "And the Word was emphatically God."
As they usually went two by two, a teacher and a student, by this time the teacher has the student by the arm and is dragging him off my porch.
But they are deeply immersed in their false religion. In 43 years of ministry I only saw one JW come to Christ.
They view on him is that he is the angel Michael , correct?
The blog I referenced is not JWs. Participants adhere to some form of Hebrew Roots, agreeing that Yeshua/Jesus is the Messiah, yet denying His Deity. Not all deny it, but most do.
2 Hebrew passages to address with them are theones where God was meeting Abrham here on Earth, and yet there was the God in heaven raing still, so God was existing both here a s a man, and still in Heaven at same time! Also, the Angel of the Lord seemed to speak for and have the very same rights as yahweh Himself!
- Status