Titus wrote in post #17 above":
"John 8:58,
- Jesus said to them, most assuredly I say to you, before Abraham was I AM
"Jews hearing what Jesus said, accuse Jesus of claiming Deity,
John 10:33,
- the jews answered Him saying, for a good work we do not stone You but for blasphemy and because You being a Man, make Yourself God
"Jesus deniers say this is a false allegation.
If it is then why did Jesus not correct them?"
..................................................
Excerpt from my study of John 10:33:
Now let's look at John 10:33-36. Notice that theon here does not have a definite article and does not come before the verb, nor is it in a "prepositional" construction. Obviously then (as context also indicates) John 10:33 should be translated "a god" (as in the trinitarian New English Bible) rather than "God" (as in the majority of trinitarian Bibles).
Noted trinitarian Dr. Robert Young's Concise Critical Bible Commentary, p. 62, confirms this understanding:
"... `makest thyself a god,' not `God' as in [KJV], otherwise the definite article would not have been omitted, as it is here, and in the next two verses, -- `gods..gods,' where the title is applied to magistrates."
And it is further admitted that this is the meaning of Jn 10:33 by trinitarian NT scholar C. H. Dodd:
"making himself a god." - The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, p. 205, Cambridge University Press, 1995 reprint.
Discussing John 10:33 a noted Trinitarian commentary says: “In the clause ‘but you are trying to make yourself God’ the Greek does not have the definite article ’the’ before the noun ‘God’ [theon]. Normally in the New Testament when God the Father is referred to, the definite article ‘the’ is used before the noun ‘God.’ Purely on the basis of the Greek text, therefore, it is possible to translate ’a god,’ as NEB does, rather than to translate ’God,’ as TEV and several other translations do. One might argue, on the basis of both the Greek and the context, that the Jews were accusing Jesus of claiming to be ‘a god’ rather than ’God.’ ” - A Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of John, Newman and Nida, p. 344, UBS, 1980.
Being strong Trinitarians, however, the authors go on to ‘explain’ how other considerations make it preferable to render John 10:33 with “God” rather than ‘a god.’ (Emphasis, as nearly always, is added by me.)
The Jews were not saying that Jesus was making himself the only true God. They were using theon in its secondary sense of the word ("a god" or "a mighty person"). This secondary sense of the word was applied in a negative sense to false gods and in a more positive sense to angels, judges, etc. by the Bible writers - (see the BOWGOD and DEF studies).
Jesus' response also shows that he understood the Jews to be using the word in its secondary sense (not "God" but "a god" - probably meant here in the negative sense of a false god), and he reminded them, by quoting Ps. 82:6, that God himself had called certain Israelites "gods" (John 10:34). With this reply Jesus showed them he could have called himself "a god" in that very same positive sense, and it would have been proper. (His reply, however, would have been nonsensical if the Jews had really said, "you make yourself God"!)
But, as Jesus pointed out, he had never applied the word (theos/theon), even in its positive secondary sense, to himself, but he had merely called himself "God's Son"! (Incidentally, God, who called those Israelites "gods," also called them his sons in Ps. 82:6.)
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, tells us in a discussion of John 10:32-39 and Psalm 82:
"The reason why judges are called `gods' in Ps. 82 is that they have the office of administering God's judgment as `sons of the Most High'. In context of the Ps. the men in question have failed to do this.... In trying to arrest him ([John] v. 39) and in disregarding the testimony of his works(vv.32,38), they were judging unjustly like the judges in Ps. 82:2. .... On the other hand, Jesus fulfilled the role of a true judge as a `god' and `son of the Most High'." - Vol. 3, p. 187.
Although bearing in mind the problems of comparing one writer's usage with another's, it is interesting to note the similarity of Acts 28:6 and John 10:33. Both use a non-"prepositional" anarthrous theon that comes after the verb. But all Bible translators translate Acts 28:6 to show that its anarthrous theon was intended in its secondary sense: "he was a god." Clearly the translation "God" at John 10:33 by the majority of trinitarian Bibles is incorrect. It has no evidence to support it and much to deny it.
.................................................
Here's my answer to the silly "I AM" argument:
http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/i-am-part-1.html
"John 8:58,
- Jesus said to them, most assuredly I say to you, before Abraham was I AM
"Jews hearing what Jesus said, accuse Jesus of claiming Deity,
John 10:33,
- the jews answered Him saying, for a good work we do not stone You but for blasphemy and because You being a Man, make Yourself God
"Jesus deniers say this is a false allegation.
If it is then why did Jesus not correct them?"
..................................................
Excerpt from my study of John 10:33:
Now let's look at John 10:33-36. Notice that theon here does not have a definite article and does not come before the verb, nor is it in a "prepositional" construction. Obviously then (as context also indicates) John 10:33 should be translated "a god" (as in the trinitarian New English Bible) rather than "God" (as in the majority of trinitarian Bibles).
Noted trinitarian Dr. Robert Young's Concise Critical Bible Commentary, p. 62, confirms this understanding:
"... `makest thyself a god,' not `God' as in [KJV], otherwise the definite article would not have been omitted, as it is here, and in the next two verses, -- `gods..gods,' where the title is applied to magistrates."
And it is further admitted that this is the meaning of Jn 10:33 by trinitarian NT scholar C. H. Dodd:
"making himself a god." - The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, p. 205, Cambridge University Press, 1995 reprint.
Discussing John 10:33 a noted Trinitarian commentary says: “In the clause ‘but you are trying to make yourself God’ the Greek does not have the definite article ’the’ before the noun ‘God’ [theon]. Normally in the New Testament when God the Father is referred to, the definite article ‘the’ is used before the noun ‘God.’ Purely on the basis of the Greek text, therefore, it is possible to translate ’a god,’ as NEB does, rather than to translate ’God,’ as TEV and several other translations do. One might argue, on the basis of both the Greek and the context, that the Jews were accusing Jesus of claiming to be ‘a god’ rather than ’God.’ ” - A Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of John, Newman and Nida, p. 344, UBS, 1980.
Being strong Trinitarians, however, the authors go on to ‘explain’ how other considerations make it preferable to render John 10:33 with “God” rather than ‘a god.’ (Emphasis, as nearly always, is added by me.)
The Jews were not saying that Jesus was making himself the only true God. They were using theon in its secondary sense of the word ("a god" or "a mighty person"). This secondary sense of the word was applied in a negative sense to false gods and in a more positive sense to angels, judges, etc. by the Bible writers - (see the BOWGOD and DEF studies).
Jesus' response also shows that he understood the Jews to be using the word in its secondary sense (not "God" but "a god" - probably meant here in the negative sense of a false god), and he reminded them, by quoting Ps. 82:6, that God himself had called certain Israelites "gods" (John 10:34). With this reply Jesus showed them he could have called himself "a god" in that very same positive sense, and it would have been proper. (His reply, however, would have been nonsensical if the Jews had really said, "you make yourself God"!)
But, as Jesus pointed out, he had never applied the word (theos/theon), even in its positive secondary sense, to himself, but he had merely called himself "God's Son"! (Incidentally, God, who called those Israelites "gods," also called them his sons in Ps. 82:6.)
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, tells us in a discussion of John 10:32-39 and Psalm 82:
"The reason why judges are called `gods' in Ps. 82 is that they have the office of administering God's judgment as `sons of the Most High'. In context of the Ps. the men in question have failed to do this.... In trying to arrest him ([John] v. 39) and in disregarding the testimony of his works(vv.32,38), they were judging unjustly like the judges in Ps. 82:2. .... On the other hand, Jesus fulfilled the role of a true judge as a `god' and `son of the Most High'." - Vol. 3, p. 187.
Although bearing in mind the problems of comparing one writer's usage with another's, it is interesting to note the similarity of Acts 28:6 and John 10:33. Both use a non-"prepositional" anarthrous theon that comes after the verb. But all Bible translators translate Acts 28:6 to show that its anarthrous theon was intended in its secondary sense: "he was a god." Clearly the translation "God" at John 10:33 by the majority of trinitarian Bibles is incorrect. It has no evidence to support it and much to deny it.
.................................................
Here's my answer to the silly "I AM" argument:
http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/i-am-part-1.html
