John 20:28
apekrithee thwmas kai eipen autw ho kurios mou
ANSWERED THOMAS AND HE SAID TO HIM THE LORD OF ME
061 2381 2532 1511_7 0846_5 3588 2962 1473_2
kai ho theos mou
AND THE GOD OF ME!
2532 3588 2316 1473_2
Westcott & Hort Interlinear
This is one of the very few instances in the Bible that it is claimed that the word THEOS is used of Jesus. Even here, however, some scholars, due to the peculiar Greek sentence structure, do not believe that Thomas meant the address "the god of me" to be directed toward Jesus, but rather to the God of Jesus. Did Thomas use the definite article twice to speak of two persons, first the son to whom he was directly speaking as "the lord of me" and then did he turn his attention to the Heavenly Father in heaven in saying "the God of me"? I don't know. I can say that if Thomas meant his whole expression to refer to only one person, only one definite article would have been needed: "the Lord and God of me".
If Thomas was referring to Jesus when he said "the THEOS of me", was he thinking that Jesus wasYahweh, the only Most High of the universe, standing there before him? Was it his purpose to identify Jesus as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? If Thomas did indeed refer to Jesus as "the THEOS of me", we find no such custom all through the New Testament of referring to Jesus as "my God", nor "our God". The Bible writers continuously distinguish the Heavenly Father as "God", and Jesus as the Son of the God, the one made Lord and Christ by God.
Such distinctions I pointed out in an earlier post:
http://groups.msn.com/DiscussionForum/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=1&ID_Message=12787 If such a doctrine as "Jesus is Yahweh" is so all-important as many today seem to assume, we should expect such to be clearly stated many times throughout the New Testament, but actually what we find is just the opposite. So if Thomas refers to Jesus as his God in John 20:28, we have an exception to the general rule, and should seek to determine in what sense Thomas might have thought of Jesus as his THEOS in harmony with the general distinction that is made throughout the rest of the New Testament. Thus, in harmony with the Hebraic tradition of applying the same words that are translated as "God" to others as rulers, princes, mighty ones, etc., Thomas, if he was applying the term THEOS, to Jesus, would have thought of Jesus as his mighty ruler, his mighty prince, not in the sense of the only Most High, Yahweh. If Thomas was calling Jesus the god of himself in John 20:28, we should understand this in the light of what the rest of the Bible says, not in the light of the trinity fabrication or other doctrinal fabrication that has to be added to the scriptures. Properly understood, Jesus has been made *ho theos* -- the might, the power -- of all true Christians, even the angels, and eventually the whole world of mankind. Recognizing the Hebraism being used, then the expression could be rendered: "My lord and my might." -- Psalm 110:2; Isaiah 9:6,7; Daniel 7:14; Matthew 28:18; Luke 1:32,33; John 3:35; 5:26,27; 13:3; 17:2; Acts 2:36; 10:38; Romans 14:9; 1 Corinthians 15:27; Colossians 1:18; 2:9,10; Ephesians 1:20-23; Hebrews 1:2,6,9; 1 Peter 3:22
http://groups.msn.com/DiscussionForum/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=1&ID_Message=14148 Some have claimed that the definite article HO before THEOS signifies that THEOS is referring to the Most High. This is not necessarily true. The definite article "Ho" is not used in John 20:28 to mean the only true God, but rather it is used because of the possessive nature of the Greek language used: "the theos of me". This does not mean that Jesus is his God, anymore than Moses is being referred to as the only true God, when Yahweh made him one of might to Pharaoh (Exodus 7:1), or the kings who figuratively speak from sheol. -- Ezekiel 32:21.
Additionally, John sums up his lesson covering these momentous events, saying, "But these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name." (John 20:31). The Apostle Thomas was a Jew who held to the view that "Yahweh our God is one Yahweh." To argue that he forsook his Jewish religious training at the moment in question and received Jesus as (the) God Yahweh is an unlikely scenario. John, who is aged and serene while writing his Gospel, summarizes this entire chapter saying, "Jesus is the Christ, the son of God." That's a clear statement of what he wanted us to believe, and by comparing spiritual revealment with spiritual revealment, we can conclude that this was what Thomas believed as well.
Futher discussion of this may be found at:
http://godandson.reslight.net/john-20-28.html In service of Jesus and his God,
Ronald
