John 20:28

[PeteSinCA]

Concur with Paul and Jac. One should not treat the book of John, the New Testament, or the Bible as if it were a source of self-contained magical sayings. Every verse has context, its immediate setting, the whole book in which it is found, and, ultimately the whole Bible.

Several people are mentioned as having been resurrected, including some by Jesus. They all died again; Jesus did not.

[WannaLearn]

I have a question too. Why are they talking about the hands when the Romans Crucifixion involved the nails going through the wrists?

[Christian2]

I have a question too. Why are they talking about the hands when the Romans Crucifixion involved the nails going through the wrists?

In those days the wrists were considered part of the hand.

[WannaLearn]

REally?

[Christian2]

REally?

That is my understanding, but the nail could have been positioned in the hand and nailed in such a way to include the wrist.

[Kurieuo]

I have a question too. Why are they talking about the hands when the Romans Crucifixion involved the nails going through the wrists?

In those days the wrists were considered part of the hand.

It may not have always been between the radius and ulna bones, as the hands with rope could have also been used.

But, either way, I have no issues myself.

[PaulSacramento]

REally?

The greek world of "hand" meant from the fingers to the elbow.

[Christian2]

REally?

The greek world of "hand" meant from the fingers to the elbow.

After some research, I found this to be true.

[jerzy]

Please note that Jn 20:28 is not a proof text. Rendition of the multiple meaning word should conform to the immediate or the overall context. Neither in this text context no in the overall Biblical context we find anything warranting rendition of the multiple meaning word “theos” as God. While there are hundreds of proof texts making such rendition false, texts like Lu 1:32 show the fallacy.

Besides, this text follows few immediately preceding proof texts like Jn 17:3 and 20:17 making them a lie.

Further, Thomas’ statement is provided by Mathew who never suggests anything remotely close. As the matter of fact, Mathew is consistent to the contrary.

Therefore, pointing to molested texts like Jn 20:28 as proof of Trinity God (or that Jesus is God contrary to his own statements) shows poor Biblical knowledge or deliberate blasphemy against the Father the only true/one/our God.

[Christian2]

Please note that Jn 20:28 is not a proof text. Rendition of the multiple meaning word should conform to the immediate or the overall context. Neither in this text context no in the overall Biblical context we find anything warranting rendition of the multiple meaning word “theos” as God. While there are hundreds of proof texts making such rendition false, texts like Lu 1:32 show the fallacy.

Besides, this text follows few immediately preceding proof texts like Jn 17:3 and 20:17 making them a lie.

Further, Thomas’ statement is provided by Mathew who never suggests anything remotely close. As the matter of fact, Mathew is consistent to the contrary.

Therefore, pointing to molested texts like Jn 20:28 as proof of Trinity God (or that Jesus is God contrary to his own statements) shows poor Biblical knowledge or deliberate blasphemy against the Father the only true/one/our God.

What problem do you have with John 17:3 and John 20:17?

[PaulSacramento]

Please note that Jn 20:28 is not a proof text. Rendition of the multiple meaning word should conform to the immediate or the overall context. Neither in this text context no in the overall Biblical context we find anything warranting rendition of the multiple meaning word “theos” as God. While there are hundreds of proof texts making such rendition false, texts like Lu 1:32 show the fallacy.

Besides, this text follows few immediately preceding proof texts like Jn 17:3 and 20:17 making them a lie.

Further, Thomas’ statement is provided by Mathew who never suggests anything remotely close. As the matter of fact, Mathew is consistent to the contrary.

Therefore, pointing to molested texts like Jn 20:28 as proof of Trinity God (or that Jesus is God contrary to his own statements) shows poor Biblical knowledge or deliberate blasphemy against the Father the only true/one/our God.

John 20:28 is, literally:
The Lord of me and the God of me.

Jesus is God and nowhere is it more explicate than in the GOJ.
That you don't understand what that MEANS is clear.
Jesus can be God and still proclaim His Father God, there is no contradiction there.
Jesus can be God and still be subject to His father, there is no contradiction there.
Jesus being God is a statement of His nature, do you understand that part?

[jerzy]

Christian2

I have no problem with Jn 17:3 or 20:17 but the Trinitarians wish those texts weren’t there in the Bible. They have nothing to show in support of their Trinity God theology. If they had it would mean that God contradicted Himself.

Check, mate.

[jerzy]

PaulSacramento

So you suggest that Thomas spoke about himself “The Lord of me and the God of me.” Why then people use this text as proof of Trinity God?

I don't need your explaining away of the scriptures which is beyond reproach that the Father is the only true/one/our God.

Please point to a proof text stating that Jesus is God instead of making up stories while rejecting hundreds of proof texts stating to the contrary.

I know you cannot because it would mean that God contradicted Himself.

[Christian2]

Christian2

I have no problem with Jn 17:3 or 20:17 but the Trinitarians wish those texts weren’t there in the Bible. They have nothing to show in support of their Trinity God theology. If they had it would mean that God contradicted Himself.

Check, mate.

I am a Trinitarian and I don't wish those tests were not in the Bible.

My interpretation of John 17:3 follows.

John 17:3 is used by non-trinitarians as a proof text that the Christ is not God, the incarnate Word of God.
Scripture in context:

John 17
Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

17 Jesus spoke these things, looked up to heaven, and said:
Father,
the hour has come.
Glorify Your Son
so that the Son may glorify You,
2 for You gave Him authority
over all flesh;[a]
so He may give eternal life
to all You have given Him.
3 This is eternal life:
that they may know You, the only true God,
and the One You have sent—Jesus Christ.
4 I have glorified You on the earth
by completing the work You gave Me to do.
5 Now, Father, glorify Me in Your presence
with that glory I had with You
before the world existed.

The Father is God -- Yod-Hei-Vav-Hei (YHVH).

Jesus called God YHVH. (or YHWH) “Father”

I believe Jesus was saying that God/Father is the only true God as opposed to false gods and idols

2 Chronicles 15:
3 For a long time Israel was without the true God, without a priest to teach and without the law. 4 But in their distress they turned to the LORD, the God of Israel, and sought him, and he was found by them. (Israel was worshiping idols then.)
The true God vs idols.

Jeremiah
10 But the LORD is the true God;
he is the living God, the eternal King.
When he is angry, the earth trembles;
the nations cannot endure his wrath.
11 "Tell them this: 'These gods, who did not make the heavens and the earth, will perish from the earth and from under the heavens.' "

The true God vs idols.

1 Thessalonians 1:9
9for they themselves report what kind of reception you gave us. They tell how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God,

The true God vs idols

1 John 5:20-21
20We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. 21Dear children, keep yourselves from idols.

True God vs idols

John 17:3

John 17:3 (New International Version)
3Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

True God vs false gods/idols

Jesus is saying there is only one God/Creator -- YHWH. He is not saying that YHWH's Word and YHWH's Spirit are not God.
Non-Trins tend to forget about verse 5:

5 Now, Father, glorify Me in Your presence
with that glory I had with You
before the world existed.

In verse 5, Jesus is saying that He existed before the world existed. That tells me Jesus Christ is eternal and only God is eternal.

Notice something else:

3 This is eternal life:
that they may know You, the only true God,
AND the One You have sent—Jesus Christ.
To have eternal life, you must KNOW God AND Jesus Christ – the two go together.

Since eternal life means "knowing" the Father and the Son intimately (in that they dwell within the believer) and Christ joins Himself to the Father in this verse, it is clear enough that it is strongly Trinitarian, not anti-Trinitarian.

Christ is also making Himself equal with God in this verse, since we must "know" both the Father, and Jesus Christ whom He has sent. While the Holy Spirit is not mentioned here, He has already been mentioned in the preceding chapters.

John 20:17 follows.

Some have objected `How can Jesus be divine if He acknowledges God to be His God, as in the words to Mary, `Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, "I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God"'' (John 20:17)

It is to be noted that when Jesus said `I am ascending to My Father and your Father and to My God and to your God', He did not to say `I am ascending to our Father and our God.' Jesus had to make the distinction between My Father and your Father and My God and your God.

It is also to be noted that in Jesus' statement we see the two natures of Christ. The statement, "My Father", points to the divine nature of Christ. When Jesus healed the man who was paralysed for 38 years the Jews objected to the healing because it took place on the Sabbath.

For this reason the Jews persecuted Jesus, and sought to kill Him, because He had done these things on the Sabbath. But Jesus answered them, `My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.' Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God. (John 5:16-18)

The Jews understood the statement `My Father' as a claim to divinity. Had the Lord Jesus said `Our Father has been working' there would have been no problem. However, Jesus intentionally made the distinction as He did in John 20:17.

When Jesus said, `My Father ', there was the reference to the divine nature in Him. When He said, `your Father', it was because they were adopted as children due to His work of redemption. When Jesus said, `My God', there was the reference to His human nature which He acquired through the incarnation. When He said, `Your God', it was because they were His creatures. Thus the one who is a Son by nature becomes a slave by the incarnation, in order that those who are slaves by nature become sons by adoption. Source: (M. Anderson, used by permission)

[PaulSacramento]

Christian2

I have no problem with Jn 17:3 or 20:17 but the Trinitarians wish those texts weren’t there in the Bible. They have nothing to show in support of their Trinity God theology. If they had it would mean that God contradicted Himself.

Check, mate.

None of those passage contradicts the doctrine of the Trinity which simply states that Jesus and His Father share the same divine nature.