Praying to the Father or Jesus?

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Is there any place where Paul explicitly says anything to the effect that "Jesus is God"? (Note, I accept the epistle to the Hebrews as an authentic Pauline epistle.)

The strongest, non-equivocal verse remains 1 Timothy 3:16 in the pure TR-AV text.

1 Timothy 3:16 (AV)
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:
God was manifest in the flesh,
justified in the Spirit,
seen of angels,
preached unto the Gentiles,
believed on in the world,
received up into glory.

Thus, from the time of Isaac Newton to the corruption versions of Westcott-Hort, radically changing this text to the "who was manifest in the flesh" Greek ὃς that is in a small number of mss. has become the fundamental chore of the low Christology proponents. To be fair, Newton wanted the Latin reading "which was manifest in the flesh" - Greek ὃ - which is more reasonable grammatically in its Greek version. In Greek it is in Codex Bezae.

Granted, what the pure and true Bible says is "God was manifest in the flesh."

A big part of the move towards the Granville Sharp nonsense was a type of horse-trading of verses, tit-for-tat. We will trade you 1 Timothy 3:16 and the heavenly witnessses and you give us some Granville Sharp verses. A Faustian bargain attempt.

Ironically, in his earlier years, Granville Sharp had properly defended the AV-TR text of 1 Timothy 3:16 in a couple of spots:

A tract on the law of nature and principles of action in man (1777)
https://archive.org/stream/tractonla...e/222/mode/2up
Also 1809
https://books.google.com/books?id=j0FMAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA263

There are other verses from Paul, and in John, and in Acts, and in Hebrews (which may have been written by Theophilus) that can be interpreted towards a "Jesus is God" position. However, not "explicitly says".

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

The strongest, non-equivocal verse remains 1 Timothy 3:16 in the pure TR-AV text.

1 Timothy 3:16 (AV)
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:
God was manifest in the flesh,
justified in the Spirit,
seen of angels,
preached unto the Gentiles,
believed on in the world,
received up into glory.

Thus, from the time of Isaac Newton to the corruption versions of Westcott-Hort, radically changing this text to the "who was manifest in the flesh" Greek ὃς that is in a small number of mss. has become the fundamental chore of the low Christology proponents. To be fair, Newton wanted the Latin reading "which was manifest in the flesh" - Greek ὃ - which is more reasonable grammatically in its Greek version. In Greek it is in Codex Bezae.

Granted, what the pure and true Bible says is "God was manifest in the flesh."

A big part of the move towards the Granville Sharp nonsense was a type of horse-trading of verses, tit-for-tat. We will trade you 1 Timothy 3:16 and the heavenly witnessses and you give us some Granville Sharp verses. A Faustian bargain attempt.

Ironically, in his earlier years, Granville Sharp had properly defended the AV-TR text of 1 Timothy 3:16 in a couple of spots:

A tract on the law of nature and principles of action in man (1777)
https://archive.org/stream/tractonla...e/222/mode/2up
Also 1809
https://books.google.com/books?id=j0FMAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA263

There are other verses from Paul, and in John, and in Acts, and in Hebrews (which may have been written by Theophilus) that can be interpreted towards a "Jesus is God" position. However, not "explicitly says".

How do you read Romans 9:5 (final clause "who is over all, God blessed for ever") per the TR?

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Esaias

How do you read Romans 9:5 (final clause "who is over all, God blessed for ever") per the TR?

Romans 9:3-5 (AV)
For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren,
my kinsmen according to the flesh:
Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption,
and the glory, and the covenants,
and the giving of the law,
and the service of God,
and the promises;
Whose are the fathers,
and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came,
who is over all,
God blessed for ever. Amen.

To make this into a Jesus is God verse, folks connect "who is" directly to God.
Similarly, John Gill adds a comma after God in his commentary. (Should check the original Gill commentary text.)

This reprint edition shows the 1611 as the same as the verse text above.
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?...ew=1up&seq=364
And in the actual 1611:
http://sceti.library.upenn.edu/sceti...ePosition=1392

As an FYI, a comma was changed (removed) from the AV 1611 of Titus 2:13.

==================

The attempt here to have a ‘Jesus is God’ verse is similar to the Granville Sharp phenomenon, working with grammatical shadows and subtleties. Clearly Paul could have simply written the syntax to say directly "Jesus (who) is God", if that were the purpose.

The learned men of the AV were simply honest with the Greek text. The learned men of Geneva were at times a bit anxious to see verses as "Jesus is God".

==================

btw, Benjamin Hall Kennedy (1804-1889)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Hall_Kennedy

was quite good on the Granville Sharp verses, perhaps also Romans 9:5.

The divinity of Christ, a sermon. With an appendix on Romans ix. 5, and Titus ii. 13 (1883)
https://books.google.com/books?id=lLQHAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA28

Also

Ely Lectures on the Revised Version of the New Testament: With an Appendix Containing the Chief Textual Changes (1882)
https://books.google.com/books?id=I8QnAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA83

"... I think the Scriptural declaration of Christ’s Godhead stands in no need of this translation, nor of that received in Rom. ix. 5. To my mind the doctrine is clearly enough declared in Phil, and Col., and assumed by the apostle throughout his writings, as well as in his history given by St. Luke. But I believe that he has everywhere avoided predicating Christ by the title Θεὸς" - p. 84.

He omits 1 Timothy 3:16 (maybe some other verses) because he was not a TR-Reformation pure Bible advocate. Frederick Field, supporting Burgon, explains the Kennedy error on 1 Timothy 3:16 quite well.

==================

[Esaias]

JFB:

To get rid of the bright testimony here borne to the supreme divinity of Christ, various expedients have been adopted: (1) To place a period, either after the words "concerning the flesh Christ came," rendering the next clause as a doxology to the Father—"God who is over all be blessed for ever"; or after the word "all"—thus, "Christ came, who is over all: God be blessed.", &c. [Erasmus, Locke, Fritzsche, Meyer, Jowett, &c.]. But it is fatal to this view, as even Socinus admits, that in other Scripture doxologies the word "Blessed" precedes the name of God on whom the blessing is invoked (thus: "Blessed be God," Ps 68:35; "Blessed be the Lord God, the God of Israel," Ps 72:18). Besides, any such doxology here would be "unmeaning and frigid in the extreme"; the sad subject on which he was entering suggesting anything but a doxology, even in connection with Christ's Incarnation [Alford]. (2) To transpose the words rendered "who is"; in which case the rendering would be, "whose (that is, the fathers') is Christ according to the flesh" [Crellius, Whiston, Taylor, Whitby]. But this is a desperate expedient, in the face of all manuscript authority; as is also the conjecture of Grotius and others, that the word "God" should be omitted from the text. It remains then, that we have here no doxology at all, but a naked statement of fact, that while Christ is "of" the Israelitish nation "as concerning the flesh," He is, in another respect, "God over all, blessed for ever." (In 2Co 11:31 the very Greek phrase which is here rendered "who is," is used in the same sense; and compare Ro 1:25, Greek). In this view of the passage, as a testimony to the supreme divinity of Christ, besides all the orthodox fathers, some of the ablest modern critics concur [Bengel, Tholuck, Stuart, Olshausen, Philippi, Alford, &c.]

[Esaias]

Bengel:

Christ is of the fathers, according to the flesh; and at the same time was, is, and shall be over all, inasmuch as He is God blessed for ever. Amen! The same praise is ascribed to the Father and the Son, 2 Corinthians 11:31. Over all, which is antithetic to, of whom, shows both the pre-existence (προὗπαρξιν) of Christ before the fathers, in opposition to His descent from the fathers according to the flesh, and His infinite majesty and dominion full of grace over Jews and Gentiles; comp. as to the phrase, Ephesians 4:6; as to the fact itself, John 8:58; Matthew 22:45. They are quite wrong, who fix the full stop either here [after πάντων], (for the comma may be placed with due respect to religion); for in that case the expression should have been, εὐλογητὸς ὁ θεός [not ὁ—θεὸς εὐλογητός], if only there had been here any peculiar occasion for such a doxology; or [who fix a full stop] after σάρκα; for in this case τὸ κατὰ σάρκα would be without its proper antithesis [which is, “who in His divine nature is God over all”].—Θεὸς, God) We should greatly rejoice, that in this solemn description Christ is so plainly called God. The apostles, who wrote before John, take for granted the deity of Christ, as a thing acknowledged; whence it is that they do not directly treat of it, but yet when it comes in their way, they mark it in a most glorious manner. Paul, ch. Romans 5:15, had called Jesus Christ man; but he now calls Him God; so also 1 Timothy 2:5; 1 Timothy 3:16. The one appellation supports the other.—εὐλογητὸς, blessed) הקבה֞. By this epithet we unite in giving all praise to God, 2 Corinthians 11:31.—εἰς τους αἰῶνας, for ever) [He] Who is above all—for ever, is the first and the last, Revelation 1:17.

[Steven Avery]

Ezra Abbot (1819-1884)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezra_Abbot

divides the grammatical tries into seven, and an outlier or two. Number 2 is supposed to be the AV, #5 is similar. However, the idea that this is a straight deity text is incorrect (see the intro to the Timothy Dwight article, and it comes up in Abbot too.)

On the Construction of Romans ix. 5 (1882)
Ezra Abbot
http://books.google.com/books?id=830FAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA87
p. 87-154
Timothy Dwight article is p. 22-55 with opposite viewpoint.
Ezra Abbot
http://books.google.com/books?id=830FAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA22

Recent Discussions of Romans ix. 5 (1883)
https://archive.org/details/journalo...iuoft/page/n93
p. 90-112
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3268764

You will, I believe, find the issues raised by Bengel (mentioned by Abbot) and JFB referenced in more depth in the Abbot articles. Overall, it would take a good chunk of study to come up to speed.

[Steven Avery]

Some information on Erasmus and Romans 9:5 I placed here:

Pure Bible Forum
Romans 9:5 used as a deity verse in the Ante-Nicene era.
Erasmus at Valladolid and Romans 9:5
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index...030/#post-6091

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Is there any place where Paul explicitly says anything to the effect that "Jesus is God"?

From what we have seen, clearly not Romans 9:5.

Note the analogy doxology verse.

2 Corinthians 11:31 (AV)
The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
which is blessed for evermore,
knoweth that I lie not.

Romans 9:5 (AV -PCE-Pure Cambridge Edition)
Whose are the fathers,
and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came,
who is over all,
God blessed for ever.
Amen.

Here you can see that the AV simply takes the Greek word order, while many other translations do a lot of mix-up.
https://breadfromabeggar.wordpress.c...ity-to-christ/

Granted,the punctuation is a second issue, however from my studies modern translators love to mix up the word order to match their doctrinal perspectives.

Christ is put after "as concerning the flesh" and "came" is implied, in italics.

[Steven Avery]

Apparently Praxeas and Noetus considered Romans 9:5 a fundamental proof-text. Here I am working first with the secondary source, which gives references for the primary. Possibly Hippolytus is the one primary source.

McClintock and Strong Biblical Cyclopedia
https://books.google.com/books?id=Z9EBrkBE4-oC&pg=PA155
http://archive.hundewadt.dk/dvd-the-...20Works/001%20
https://www.biblicalcyclopedia.com/N...y/MSE_0702.PDF
p. 144-148

Noetus ... In his views, which he published about A.D. 200, he appeals, like Praxeas, to Romans ix, 5, where Christ is called the one God over all.

We go to Hippolytus:

Against the Heresy of One Noetus
https://books.google.com/books?id=aDcMAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA225
https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf...crCh=3&scrV=36

Nice. Hippolyus gives us (on p. 224) the position of Noetus, then follows with his interpretation.

Noetus
Do you see, he says, how the Scriptures proclaim one God? And as this is clearly exhibited, and these passages are testimonies to it, I am under necessity, he says, since one is acknowledged, to make this One the subject of suffering. For Christ was God, and suffered on account of us, being Himself the Father, that He might be able also to save us. And we cannot express ourselves otherwise, he says; for the apostle also acknowledges one God, when he says, “Whose are the fathers, (and) of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever.”

Hippolytus
6. Let us look next at the apostle’s word: “Whose are the fathers, of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever.”1630 This word declares the mystery of the truth rightly and clearly. He who is over all is God; for thus He speaks boldly, “All things are delivered unto me of my Father.”1631 He who is over all, God blessed, has been born; and having been made man, He is (yet) God for ever. For to this effect John also has said, “Which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.”1632 And well has he named Christ the Almighty. For in this he has said only what Christ testifies of Himself. For Christ gave this testimony, and said, “All things are delivered unto me of my Father;”1633 and Christ rules all things, and has been appointed1634 Almighty by the Father. And in like manner Paul also, in setting forth the truth that all things are delivered unto Him, said, “Christ the first-fruits; afterwards they that are Christ’s at His coming. Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when He shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and power. For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For all things are put under Him. But when He saith, All things are put under Him, it is manifest that He is excepted which did put all things under Him. Then shall He also Himself be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.”1635 If, therefore, all things are put under Him with the exception of Him who put them under Him, He is Lord of all, and the Father is Lord of Him, that in all there might be manifested one God, to whom all things are made subject together with Christ, to whom the Father hath made all things subject, with the exception of Himself. And this, indeed, is said by Christ Himself, as when in the Gospel He confessed Him to be His Father and His God. For He speaks thus: “I go to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God.”1636 If then, Noetus ventures to say that He is the Father Himself, to what father will he say Christ goes away according to the word of the Gospel? But if he will have us abandon the Gospel and give credence to his senselessness, he expends his labour in vain; for “we ought to obey God rather than men.”1637

1630 Rom. ix. 5.
1631 Matt. xi. 27.
1632 Apoc. i. 8.
1633 Matt. xi. 27. [Compare John v. 22.]
1634 [Strictly scriptural as to the humanity of Messiah, Heb. i. 9.]
1635 1 Cor. xv. 23–28.
1636 John xx. 17.
1637 Acts v. 29; iv. 19.

Other sources on this ...

Benjamin Hall Kennedy
https://books.google.com/books?id=lLQHAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA27

Schaaf
https://books.google.com/books?id=3SLHwtl8x9oC&pg=PA555

and this recent writing.

The Interpretation of John 10:30 in the Third Century: Anti-Monarchian Polemics and the Rise of Grammatical Reading Techniques (2012)
Mark DelCogliano
https://www.academia.edu/1859907/The...ing_Techniques

Oops, nothing in that one on Romans 9:5.

And maybe a bit more specific research and searching will help, quite a topic!

[shag]

And yet no one has seen God at any time - 1 John 4:12

Mercy...