How do JWs explain John 20:28?

by Zico 58 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Narkissos

  Zico,

  For John, Jesus was God, I think. As shown by his quoting of Thomas and John 1:1.

  The point is made even clearer when you notice that the confession of Thomas (validated by Jesus as the very essence of faith, especially if it is reached without resorting to sight, v. 29) was at one stage the end of the Gospel (cf. the now "first" conclusion in v. 30f, chapter 21 having been added later with a second conclusion) -- forming a nice verbal inclusio with 1:1 (the beginning and the end of the work echoing to each other).

  Of course I would qualify "Jesus was God" as I tried to do above -- Jesus was God in the Son's way, which is not the Father's way -- not "inferior" but symmetrical.

  Pahpa,

  I have always been convinced that one of the reasons the trinity became the leading doctrine of orthodoxy in the church was because of the strong anti-semitic movement that developed. This doctrine in particular separated the last connection between Jews and Christians. And eventually gave the church an excuse to persecute the Jews as "God killers."

  Interesting, but it's a bit of a chicken-and-egg question, isn't it? Why stop at the 4th century and not look back into the NT itself? In the Fourth Gospel the enemies of the Divine Christ are consistently called "the Jews" and pictured as children of the devil. In Pauline literature too you find violent anti-Jewish passages (1 Thessalonians 2:14ff). But even in theologically opposite Jewish Christianity, which holds to a "lower" Christology, there are strong anti-Jewish tendencies with the theme of the Church forming a "third race" ("the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people that produces the fruits of the kingdom," Matthew 21:43). Christian antisemitism is a complex issue, early Christian anti-Judaism is another, and their relationship all the more. (Cf. greendawn's comments above which seem to be both anti-trinitarian and anti-jewish.)
• 

  greendawn

  Narkissos, you like Terry you obviously don't believe that the theology and general doctrine of the early church was uniform but rather incoherent and even contradictory. This is not the case as far as I can see except that the Christian Jews had found it impossible to abandon the Mosaic Law and fully accept the gentile Christians who were outside the law and the two groups never really mixed.

  To some extend this is understandable since they were in essence captives to the Jews who would have hammered them to the ground had they abandoned the Mosaic Law, it was a case of survival, they already hated them enough just for accepting Jesus as the Messiah.

  Beyond that I can't detect any contradictory ideology in the NT authors they all seem to be of one mind John, Peter, Paul. Paul very clearly has a subordinationist view of Jesus and John doesn' t contradict him since in Revelation we see a Jesus calling the Father "my God" several times and stating that he sat upon the throne of God after completing a victorious course.

  So Zico, to them Jesus was granted godship by the Father. By accepting Jesus as God, a second God, is not polytheism because it was God Himself that gave him that status and God has the right to do so if He so wishes and also the two are in such total harmony that it makes no difference who you think of as God there is absolute trust between the two and not a trace of mistrust or suspicion. They are not one in the mysterious Trinitarian sense but one in mind and purpose. And Jesus does not have a grabbing mentality like Satan does and is certainly not one puffed up with pride and seeking his own glorification, he still sees his godship as serving the interests of His Father and of mankind. He conquers everything and ultimately submits himself to the Father so that everything will be under the Father. It's as simple as that. Jesus was granted equality with God versus the creation but still the Father is overall infinitely greater than the Son.

  Narkissos there is no doubt that Russell was a fanatical Zionist, I have no problem with the Jews having their own homeland in what was historically Israel, but Russell was advising the Jews not to accept Christianity which to me is subversive for a so called Christian leader to do. Rutherford did turn against the Jews and Masons later but I am not sure whether this was genuine or a cunning tactical move to reconcile/placate Hitler and protect the WTS interests in Germany. He wanted to throw up a smoke screen to conceal the known intimate connections between the JWs and the Jews/Masons. Obviously Hitler wasn't persuaded.

  Pahpa there was a masonic letter in Switzerland which plainly states that the WTS was being financed by the American Jewish masons. It was used by Ferhmann in court circa 1923 to defend himself against the JWs who had accused him of falsely claiming judeomasonic financing of the JWs.
• 

  Zico

  Narkissos,
  
  Do you believe John 20:29 - 21:25 onwards was written by the same writer as John 1:1 - 20:28 then?
  
  Greendawn,
  
  'also the two are in such total harmony that it makes no difference who you think of as God'
  
  I think this is the main thing isn't it? As I sort of said before, if Jesus and the Father have lived together for eternity in perfect love, they're hardly going to care which one people prefer to worship, and make it a part of salvation. (Or at least I don't think they would...)
  
  Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me as well Greendawn.
• 

  Pahpa

  Narkissos

  I don't think there is any doubt that Paul was making reference to the specific Jews who were persecuting Jewish Christians in Judea. (1 Thess. 2:14) But I doubt that it was an "anti-semitic" prejudice against all Jews since Paul, himself, was a Jew as were the majority of those in the Judean congregations. Likewise, I am sure that John understood the same situation when he referred to the "Jews" who were opposers and persecutors of Jesus and his disciples. John speaks favorably of some Jews in the gospel account. He makes the distinction between those Jews who responded to the message and to those who became active opposers to it. He certainly wasn't painting the Jews "with a broad brush" of anti-semitic hatred.

  Greendawn

  Do you have the specific reference to that letter? I would be interested in its contents to see if it was based on fact or opinion. Much of Russell's Masonic connection has been based upon speculation and inference rather than solid facts.

  Zico

  The information contained in John 20:28 has to be taken into consideration with the context of John's gospel. For example, John 20:17 records Jesus' words "I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." And John summerizes his account about Jesus by saying "But these are written that yhou may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." (20:31) There seems little ambiguity to these statements.
• 

  Narkissos

  Zico

  Do you believe John 20:29 - 21:25 onwards was written by the same writer as John 1:1 - 20:28 then?

  Literary analysis (narrative gaps, discrepancies, parallel developments) suggests that the Gospel of John probably went through a long redactional and editorial process before it reached its extant form, and that must have required a number of "writers". The Prologue itself was most likely added and developed at some point. But chapter 21 seems to be an even later addition, as shown by the earlier conclusion of the book in 20:30f, new linguistic features in chapter 21, and reference to the death of the beloved disciple for instance. So at some (penultimate?) stage 1:1 / 20:28f may have constituted the formal inclusio I was referring to.

  Pahpa,

  Antisemitism and antijudaism are conceptually distinct although historically related. It would be stupid to ascribe antisemitism to the NT authors. It would be equally stupid not to ascribe antijudaism to most of them. What do you think hoi Ioudaioi could mean to their (Gentile) audience? Could they ignore it?
• 

  A Paduan

  These statements for their argument (wt/1962) are somewhat lacking

  However, Professor C. F. D. Moule says that the article the before the noun God may not be significant so as to mean such a thing.

  And anyway, who's he ? and where's the quote in context anyway ?

  How, then, could Thomas in an ecstasy of joy at seeing the resurrected Jesus for the first time burst out with an exclamation and speak to Jesus himself as being the one and only living, true God, the God whose name is Jehovah?

  That wasn't even the argument - they've put up a strawman to further the debate - yet again

  The writers do not have the 'stuff' that it takes
• 

  TopHat

  The way I see it, Thomas adressed two different persons.....My Lord=Jesus/ AND My God=The Almighty God
• 

  UnDisfellowshipped

  The Apostle Thomas was a Jew, and the Jews (at the time of Jesus) were strict monotheists. They did not tolerate polytheism at all. They knew these Scriptures extremely well:

  Exodus 20:3 (ESV): "You shall have no other gods before me.

  Deuteronomy 13:1-5 (ESV): "If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, 'Let us go after other gods,' which you have not known, 'and let us serve them,'you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. [...] But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has taught rebellion against the LORD your God [...]

  Psalm 81:9 (ESV): There shall be no strange god among you; you shall not bow down to a foreign god.

  Isaiah 43:10-11 (ESV): "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD [Jehovah], "and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me. I, I am the LORD [Jehovah], and besides me there is no savior.

  Deuteronomy 32:39 (ESV): "'See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

  Deuteronomy 4:35 (ESV): To you it was shown, that you might know that the LORD is God; there is no other besides him.

  2 Samuel 7:22 (ESV): Therefore you are great, O LORD [Jehovah] God. For there is none like you, and there is no God besides you, according to all that we have heard with our ears.

  1 Kings 8:23 (ESV): and said, "O LORD [Jehovah], God of Israel, there is no God like you, in heaven above or on earth beneath, keeping covenant and showing steadfast love to your servants who walk before you with all their heart,

  Isaiah 45:5-6 (ESV): I am the LORD [Jehovah], and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I equip you, though you do not know me, that people may know, from the rising of the sun and from the west, that there is none besides me; I am the LORD [Jehovah], and there is no other.

  Isaiah 44:6-8 (ESV): Thus says the LORD [Jehovah], the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD [Jehovah] of hosts: "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god. Who is like me? Let him proclaim it. Let him declare and set it before me, since I appointed an ancient people. Let them declare what is to come, and what will happen. Fear not, nor be afraid; have I not told you from of old and declared it? And you are my witnesses! Is there a God besides me? There is no Rock; I know not any."

  Isaiah 45:21-23 (ESV): Declare and present your case; let them take counsel together! Who told this long ago? Who declared it of old? Was it not I, the LORD [Jehovah]? And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me. "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other. By myself I have sworn; from my mouth has gone out in righteousness a word that shall not return: 'To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear allegiance.'

  Isaiah 42:8 (ESV): I am the LORD [Jehovah]; that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols.

  Isaiah 48:11-13 (ESV): For my own sake, for my own sake, I do it, for how should my name be profaned? My glory I will not give to another. "Listen to me, O Jacob, and Israel, whom I called! I am he; I am the first, and I am the last. My hand laid the foundation of the earth, and my right hand spread out the heavens; when I call to them, they stand forth together.

  Hosea 13:4-5 (ESV): But I am the LORD your God from the land of Egypt; you know no God but me, and besides me there is no savior. It was I who knew you in the wilderness, in the land of drought;

  Therefore, for a Jew to believe in and serve and worship more than one God was idolatry and blasphemy and was a sin of the highest order.

  Saying something like "Oh my God!" or "Oh God!" for a Jew would also have been a sin, "Taking the Name of the Lord in vain." In fact, the Jews had stopped even saying the Divine Name for fear that they would use it in vain.

  Thomas said to Jesus "The Lord of me and The God of me" in the Greek (see the Kingdom Interlinear Translation), even though he knew all of the above Scriptures that declare that JEHOVAH is the ONLY GOD for Jews.

  Did Thomas believe in two different Gods who were both THE God of him? That would have been polytheism and idolatry. Did Thomas believe in two Gods -- one Almighty and the other a lesser, inferior, created god? That is also polytheism and idolatry.

  Or, did Thomas believe that both The Father and The Son are The One True God together, as Jesus Himself taught? Look what Jesus had taught:

  Mark 12:29-32 (ESV): Jesus answered, "The most important is, 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.' The second is this: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no other commandment greater than these." And the scribe said to him, "You are right, Teacher. You have truly said that he is one, and there is no other besides him.

  John 10:29-30 (ESV): My Father ... is greater than all ... I and the Father are one."

  John 5:22-23 (ESV): The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.
• 

  Liza

  I myself am very confused about this too.
  
  There are sites showing scriptures that are for and against the trinity. I myslef am still reluctant to accept a trinity view mainly because da Vinci Code fanatics like to poke at it too much to support beleiving a novel with made-up evidence.
  
  However there are several ways to approach it:
  
  Maybe it's like the movie, "Bruce Almighty" where God is a changable position. Like greendawn mentioned, maybe Jesus wasn't God, but in Revelations or after he died he became God and Yaweh went on to do something else.
  
  Maybe Jesus was "splitted" from God. After dying he "reunited" with God. Which could be a reason why "Yaweh" no longer appears in the NT, but "Lord" does.
  
  This is a very hard to grasp thing because we are dealing with supernatural hohaa and laws and forces outside of known logic and physics, quantam physics tends to get like this too. Though it is intresting to mention that quantam theorists like to say a lot that light can exist at two places at once.
• 

  Doug Mason

  I think it is important to separate "nature" from "role".
  
  Firstly, "nature":
  What are the innate attributes that make the Father to be "God"? I am still waiting for the semi-Arian WTS to provide its understanding.
  In what way is the nature of the eternal Son different from the nature of the Father? This can be answered at the human level -- a human child has the same human nature as its father.
  
  Regarding "role" (as in subordination, for example):
  The essential attributes of the nature possessed by a person are not altered by the role they assume. For example (again at the human level), a person might hold a position of high office, but they possess only the very same attributes of human nature that are possessed by every other person.
  Jesus obeyed and prayed, but he did not divest his pre-existent nature when he added the attributes of perfect human nature.
  
  It would be surprising if it were possible to understand God, for He is on an infinite plane. Only Jesus is in completely unity with the Father, so much so that one can look at Jesus and know the Father.
  
  We must ensure we do not make God in our image.
  
  Doug