Even if Joseph Thayer was a Unitarian - I have only seen what others said about him and not anything he had written - his lexicon (in several places) does teach the Lord Jesus is God.
1 Corinthians 4:5 Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men’s hearts; and then each man’s praise will come to him from God. (NASB) 1. Concerning 'Lord' (kyrios): to Jesus http://biblehub.com/greek/2962.htm 2. Concerning 'disclose' (phaneroō): of God as judge, 1 Corinthians 4:5 http://biblehub.com/greek/5319.htm
1 Corinthians 11:32 But when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord so that we will not be condemned along with the world. (NASB) 1. Concerning 'disciplined' (paideuō): in bibl. and eccl. use employed of God, to chasten by the infliction of evils and calamities...1 Corinthians 11:32 http://biblehub.com/greek/3811.htm 2. Concerning 'Lord' (kyrios): On the other hand, κρινόμενοι ὑπό τοῦ κυρίου in 1 Corinthians 11:32 must certainly, I think, be taken of Christ, on account of 10:22, cf. 10:21 http://biblehub.com/greek/2962.htm
Colossians 2:9 For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form. (NASB) 1. Concerning 'Deity' (theotēs): the state of being God. http://biblehub.com/greek/2320.htm
1 Peter 2:25 For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls. (NASB) 1. Concerning 'to' (epi: C 2 f): to God http://biblehub.com/greek/1909.htm 2. Concerning 'Shepherd' (poimēn): of Christ http://biblehub.com/greek/4166.htm
2 Peter 3:18 but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen. (NASB) 1. Concerning 'glory' (doxa): so as to honor God, to promote his glory (among men):...in doxologies...2 Peter 3:18 http://biblehub.com/greek/1391.htm 2. Concerning 'grow' (auxanō): of inward Christian growth: εἰς Χριστόν, in reference to (Winer's Grammar, 397 (371); yet cf. Ellicott at the passage) Christ, Ephesians 4:15; εἰς ναόν, so as to form a temple, Ephesians 2:21; ἐν χάριτι, 2 Peter 3:18 https://biblehub.com/greek/837.htm
Revelation 3:19 Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline; therefore be zealous and repent. (NASB) 1. The Lord Jesus is the speaker in Revelation 3:19. 2. Concerning 'discipline' (paideuō): in Biblical and ecclesiastical use employed of God, to chasten by the infliction of evils and calamities...Revelation 3:19 (paideuō) https://biblehub.com/greek/3811.htm
Revelation 5:12 saying with a loud voice, “Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power and riches and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing.” (NASB) 1. Concerning 'wisdom' (sophia): supreme intelligence, such as belongs to God: Rev. 7:12, also to Christ, exalted to God's right hand, Rev. 5:12 (sophia). http://biblehub.com/greek/4678.htm The Lord Jesus possesses "supreme intelligence" which is the same thing as saying He is omniscient (God). http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/supreme?s=t
Revelation 22:13 “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” (NASB) 1. Concerning the Greek word protos (first): the Eternal One, Rev. 1:17; 2:8; 22:13 http://biblehub.com/greek/4413.htm The Eternal One is "the Alpha and the Omega" and "on the meaning of the phrase cf. Rev. 11.17" http://biblehub.com/greek/1.htm Thus, the Lord Jesus is the "Lord God, the Almighty" (cf. Revelation 11:17).
I'll say it again: these quotes tell us little/nothing about Thayer. He was editing someone else's work. If you can find it, see an original Thayer lexicon that includes brackets. Maybe the point will stick then.
One could read 1 Corinthians 4:5 as talking about two different persons: God and the Lord Jesus Christ. Only one with Trinitarian presuppositions would automatically conclude that the verse proves Christ is God.
JWs would agree that 1 Cor. 11:32 is speaking about Christ. From what you quote above, still no evidence that the verse or Thayer's lexicon gives proof for the deity of Christ in connection with 1 Cor. 11:32.
Thayer's is the one you referred to as a N.T. lexicon by Unitarians. Despite it being well over a hundred years old it contains plenty of evidence the Lord Jesus is God. Since the jury is still out cold concerning other NT lexicons by Unitarians this is the best that could be referred to. That's abysmal.
If the JW's agree that 1 Corinthians 11:32 is about Christ then that means Jesus is Jehovah. https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/l/r1/lp-e?q=1+Corinthians+11%3A32
I have learned about Shlichut. Jehovah works through people, but people are not to be referred to as being Jehovah. Jesus is. Furthermore, the concept of "Agency" does not apply at all in the area of prayer that is directly rendered unto the Lord Jesus (cf. Acts 1:24-25; 7:59-60) since one can just as easily render prayer directly unto the Father. An "agent" is therefore unnecessary.
You ignored the passages in which Jesus is prayed to because they refute your false teaching.
John 16:23 does not forbid praying to Jesus. The context has to do with the apostles not asking the Lord Jesus anymore questions concerning His figurative teachings concerning His resurrection (John 16:18, 30). Their understanding will increase when the Holy Spirit would later be given to them. At that time such questions will no longer be asked.
A. W. Pink: Strangely and deplorably has this been perverted by some. There have been a few who have argued from this verse that we are here forbidden to address Christ, directly, in prayer. But Acts 1:24; 7:59 , to say nothing of many passages in the Epistles, dearly refutes such an error. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/awp/john-16.html
And this from (Unitarian) John Schoenheit: In looking at John 16:23, we must remember that John 14:14, 16:23 were both spoken at the Last Supper, perhaps only a very short while apart. The disciples were not confused by the “apparent contradiction,” and we should not be either. The disciples had been asking Jesus many questions, and there was a lot they did not understand. So, for example, they asked, “Where are you going” (John 13:36); “Why am I not able to follow you now” (John 13:37); “How are we able to know the way” (John 14:5); “Show us the Father” (John 14:8); “How is it you will reveal yourself to us and not to the world” (John 14:22); “What is this that he is saying, ‘A little while?’” (John 16:17-18). Jesus knew the disciples had lots of questions, and carefully navigated his way through them throughout the Last Supper, answering some while not answering others. As he got to the end of the Last Supper, he told his disciples, “In that day you will not ask me anything,” (perhaps Charles William’s translation is clearer: “At that time you will ask me no more questions”). The disciples would not have to ask questions because, for one thing, Jesus said, “I will no longer speak to you in figures of speech, but will tell you plainly of the Father” (John 16:25), plus, after Jesus’ death, resurrection, and ascension, they would understand all the things they had questions about—something that is quite plain in Acts, as we see the once-ignorant and dumbfounded apostles become bold proclaimers of the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ. https://www.revisedenglishversion.com/commentary/John/16
FR, one thing you are missing is that the Christ was to have a specific name -Matthew 1:21. (Imannuel and/or yehoshua) this name was not a description of the person but rather the indication of who owned him and his mission. Both names had already been used for others and did not indicate god the son. So how would calling on his name be calling on the person? The term for pray is throughout the NT so why you keep insisting that to call on the name should mean pray is just demonstrating the trinitarian bias.
2 Timothy 2:22 a. John Schoenheit: “call on the Lord.” This is a prayer formula, and refers to prayer to Jesus Christ https://www.revisedenglishversion.com/comm/2Tim/2/nav22 b. The Watchtower: If the heart is filled with unclean thoughts or fantasies, how can one call upon Jehovah God in prayer out of a pure heart—1 Tim. 5:2; 2 Tim. 2:22. (Beware of Adulterous Leanings!, September 1, 1973, page 540) https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1973647
"Marc (FR), it’s no good quoting lexicons. My argument is that this line of interpretation is wrong, largely because it fails to take the narrative-apocalyptic context into account. I have tried to show how that is the case. By all means point out to me the flaws in my exegesis, but don’t just keep cutting and pasting chunks from the lexicons."
One thing I can see, Duncan, is that the aorist participle in Acts 1:24 does not refer to the same act of speaking as the blogger writes: an aorist participle could refer to contemporaneous or posterior action, but in this verse, the act of prayer is antecedent to the act of speaking.
IMO, Acts 15:8 seems to militate against the "Lord" of Acts 1:24 being Jesus. Moreover, see Proverbs 16:33.
For info on aorist participles, see https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2013/01/notes-on-aorist-participle-luke-1018.html
Your implication that the authors of the lexicons somehow failed to take into account what you mentioned is grasping at straws.
Just as one is to "love the Lord" in reference to Jesus (1 Corinthians 16:22) one is to also "love God" (Romans 8:28). Thus, when it reads the Lord is the heartknower of all in reference to Jesus (Acts 1:24) this corresponds to God being the heartknower of all in Acts 15:8. Notice also that the same Greek word for "chosen" used by Luke in Acts 1:2 in reference to Jesus also appears in Acts 1:24 with Jesus in view. The same also applies with "show" (Luke 10:1; cf. Acts 1:24). Finally, the same "Lord" is used for Jesus just moments earlier in Acts 1:21 (cf. v. 6).
Before I am accused of Trinitarian bias, see here: https://tidings.org/articles/comment-speaking-to-jesus-christ/
and here: https://www.revisedenglishversion.com/Commentary/Acts
FR, the Trinitarian scholar D. Bock said it's far from clear which Lord is meant in Acts 1:24. This issue is not resolved and for many reasons, one can cast doubt on identifying Jesus as the Lord in the Luke-Acts passage.
18 comments:
Even if Joseph Thayer was a Unitarian - I have only seen what others said about him and not anything he had written - his lexicon (in several places) does teach the Lord Jesus is God.
1 Corinthians 4:5
Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men’s hearts; and then each man’s praise will come to him from God. (NASB)
1. Concerning 'Lord' (kyrios): to Jesus
http://biblehub.com/greek/2962.htm
2. Concerning 'disclose' (phaneroō): of God as judge, 1 Corinthians 4:5
http://biblehub.com/greek/5319.htm
1 Corinthians 11:32
But when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord so that we will not be condemned along with the world. (NASB)
1. Concerning 'disciplined' (paideuō): in bibl. and eccl. use employed of God, to chasten by the infliction of evils and calamities...1 Corinthians 11:32
http://biblehub.com/greek/3811.htm
2. Concerning 'Lord' (kyrios): On the other hand, κρινόμενοι ὑπό τοῦ κυρίου in 1 Corinthians 11:32 must certainly, I think, be taken of Christ, on account of 10:22, cf. 10:21
http://biblehub.com/greek/2962.htm
Colossians 2:9
For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form. (NASB)
1. Concerning 'Deity' (theotēs): the state of being God.
http://biblehub.com/greek/2320.htm
1 Peter 2:25
For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls. (NASB)
1. Concerning 'to' (epi: C 2 f): to God
http://biblehub.com/greek/1909.htm
2. Concerning 'Shepherd' (poimēn): of Christ
http://biblehub.com/greek/4166.htm
2 Peter 3:18
but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen. (NASB)
1. Concerning 'glory' (doxa): so as to honor God, to promote his glory (among men):...in doxologies...2 Peter 3:18
http://biblehub.com/greek/1391.htm
2. Concerning 'grow' (auxanō): of inward Christian growth: εἰς Χριστόν, in reference to (Winer's Grammar, 397 (371); yet cf. Ellicott at the passage) Christ, Ephesians 4:15; εἰς ναόν, so as to form a temple, Ephesians 2:21; ἐν χάριτι, 2 Peter 3:18
https://biblehub.com/greek/837.htm
Revelation 3:19
Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline; therefore be zealous and repent. (NASB)
1. The Lord Jesus is the speaker in Revelation 3:19.
2. Concerning 'discipline' (paideuō): in Biblical and ecclesiastical use employed of God, to chasten by the infliction of evils and calamities...Revelation 3:19 (paideuō)
https://biblehub.com/greek/3811.htm
Revelation 5:12
saying with a loud voice, “Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power and riches and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing.” (NASB)
1. Concerning 'wisdom' (sophia): supreme intelligence, such as belongs to God: Rev. 7:12, also to Christ, exalted to God's right hand, Rev. 5:12 (sophia).
http://biblehub.com/greek/4678.htm
The Lord Jesus possesses "supreme intelligence" which is the same thing as saying He is omniscient (God).
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/supreme?s=t
Revelation 22:13
“I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” (NASB)
1. Concerning the Greek word protos (first): the Eternal One, Rev. 1:17; 2:8; 22:13
http://biblehub.com/greek/4413.htm
The Eternal One is "the Alpha and the Omega" and "on the meaning of the phrase cf. Rev. 11.17"
http://biblehub.com/greek/1.htm
Thus, the Lord Jesus is the "Lord God, the Almighty" (cf. Revelation 11:17).
I'll say it again: these quotes tell us little/nothing about Thayer. He was editing someone else's work. If you can find it, see an original Thayer lexicon that includes brackets. Maybe the point will stick then.
One could read 1 Corinthians 4:5 as talking about two different persons: God and the Lord Jesus Christ. Only one with Trinitarian presuppositions would automatically conclude that the verse proves Christ is God.
JWs would agree that 1 Cor. 11:32 is speaking about Christ. From what you quote above, still no evidence that the verse or Thayer's lexicon gives proof for the deity of Christ in connection with 1 Cor. 11:32.
Thayer's is the one you referred to as a N.T. lexicon by Unitarians. Despite it being well over a hundred years old it contains plenty of evidence the Lord Jesus is God.
Since the jury is still out cold concerning other NT lexicons by Unitarians this is the best that could be referred to. That's abysmal.
If the JW's agree that 1 Corinthians 11:32 is about Christ then that means Jesus is Jehovah.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/l/r1/lp-e?q=1+Corinthians+11%3A32
Thanks
Jehovah is judging through Jesus.
Learn about Shlichut.
I have learned about Shlichut. Jehovah works through people, but people are not to be referred to as being Jehovah. Jesus is. Furthermore, the concept of "Agency" does not apply at all in the area of prayer that is directly rendered unto the Lord Jesus (cf. Acts 1:24-25; 7:59-60) since one can just as easily render prayer directly unto the Father. An "agent" is therefore unnecessary.
John 14:6 "Jesus said to him: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me"
16:23 In that day you will ask me no question at all. Most truly I say to you, if you ask the Father for anything, he will give it to you in my name.
You ignored the passages in which Jesus is prayed to because they refute your false teaching.
John 16:23 does not forbid praying to Jesus. The context has to do with the apostles not asking the Lord Jesus anymore questions concerning His figurative teachings concerning His resurrection (John 16:18, 30). Their understanding will increase when the Holy Spirit would later be given to them. At that time such questions will no longer be asked.
A. W. Pink: Strangely and deplorably has this been perverted by some. There have been a few who have argued from this verse that we are here forbidden to address Christ, directly, in prayer. But Acts 1:24; 7:59 , to say nothing of many passages in the Epistles, dearly refutes such an error.
http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/awp/john-16.html
And this from (Unitarian) John Schoenheit: In looking at John 16:23, we must remember that John 14:14, 16:23 were both spoken at the Last Supper, perhaps only a very short while apart. The disciples were not confused by the “apparent contradiction,” and we should not be either. The disciples had been asking Jesus many questions, and there was a lot they did not understand. So, for example, they asked, “Where are you going” (John 13:36); “Why am I not able to follow you now” (John 13:37); “How are we able to know the way” (John 14:5); “Show us the Father” (John 14:8); “How is it you will reveal yourself to us and not to the world” (John 14:22); “What is this that he is saying, ‘A little while?’” (John 16:17-18). Jesus knew the disciples had lots of questions, and carefully navigated his way through them throughout the Last Supper, answering some while not answering others. As he got to the end of the Last Supper, he told his disciples, “In that day you will not ask me anything,” (perhaps Charles William’s translation is clearer: “At that time you will ask me no more questions”). The disciples would not have to ask questions because, for one thing, Jesus said, “I will no longer speak to you in figures of speech, but will tell you plainly of the Father” (John 16:25), plus, after Jesus’ death, resurrection, and ascension, they would understand all the things they had questions about—something that is quite plain in Acts, as we see the once-ignorant and dumbfounded apostles become bold proclaimers of the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ.
https://www.revisedenglishversion.com/commentary/John/16
FR, one thing you are missing is that the Christ was to have a specific name -Matthew 1:21. (Imannuel and/or yehoshua) this name was not a description of the person but rather the indication of who owned him and his mission. Both names had already been used for others and did not indicate god the son. So how would calling on his name be calling on the person? The term for pray is throughout the NT so why you keep insisting that to call on the name should mean pray is just demonstrating the trinitarian bias.
So much for Trinitarian bias...
2 Timothy 2:22
a. John Schoenheit: “call on the Lord.” This is a prayer formula, and refers to prayer to Jesus Christ
https://www.revisedenglishversion.com/comm/2Tim/2/nav22
b. The Watchtower: If the heart is filled with unclean thoughts or fantasies, how can one call upon Jehovah God in prayer out of a pure heart—1 Tim. 5:2; 2 Tim. 2:22. (Beware of Adulterous Leanings!, September 1, 1973, page 540)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1973647
https://www.postost.net/2017/02/why-talking-exalted-jesus-not-prayer
Edgar, I welcome comments on this post as my Greek understanding is still relatively basic.
https://www.postost.net/2017/02/calling-name-lord-jesus
"Marc (FR), it’s no good quoting lexicons. My argument is that this line of interpretation is wrong, largely because it fails to take the narrative-apocalyptic context into account. I have tried to show how that is the case. By all means point out to me the flaws in my exegesis, but don’t just keep cutting and pasting chunks from the lexicons."
One thing I can see, Duncan, is that the aorist participle in Acts 1:24 does not refer to the same act of speaking as the blogger writes: an aorist participle could refer to contemporaneous or posterior action, but in this verse, the act of prayer is antecedent to the act of speaking.
IMO, Acts 15:8 seems to militate against the "Lord" of Acts 1:24 being Jesus. Moreover, see Proverbs 16:33.
For info on aorist participles, see https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2013/01/notes-on-aorist-participle-luke-1018.html
I would like to write an update in the future.
Duncan,
Your implication that the authors of the lexicons somehow failed to take into account what you mentioned is grasping at straws.
Just as one is to "love the Lord" in reference to Jesus (1 Corinthians 16:22) one is to also "love God" (Romans 8:28). Thus, when it reads the Lord is the heartknower of all in reference to Jesus (Acts 1:24) this corresponds to God being the heartknower of all in Acts 15:8.
Notice also that the same Greek word for "chosen" used by Luke in Acts 1:2 in reference to Jesus also appears in Acts 1:24 with Jesus in view. The same also applies with "show" (Luke 10:1; cf. Acts 1:24). Finally, the same "Lord" is used for Jesus just moments earlier in Acts 1:21 (cf. v. 6).
Before I am accused of Trinitarian bias, see here:
https://tidings.org/articles/comment-speaking-to-jesus-christ/
and here:
https://www.revisedenglishversion.com/Commentary/Acts
"all authority was given" - does that sound coequal and coeternal to you?
Love God and love Jesus - your point is?
After acts 1:24 they cast lots, are you sure they are praying to Jesus?
I think you are getting your lords confused.
Luke 10:1?
That the prayer is to the Lord Jesus has already been shown in my comments here:
https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2021/10/acts-124-comments-from-scholars.html
Nothing in Acts 1:26 goes againts this.
FR, the Trinitarian scholar D. Bock said it's far from clear which Lord is meant in Acts 1:24. This issue is not resolved and for many reasons, one can cast doubt on identifying Jesus as the Lord in the Luke-Acts passage.
Please see here:
https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2021/10/acts-124-comments-from-scholars.html
Post a Comment