Free wrote:
“Unless you have been formally trained in Greek, your understanding of it is
useless and will not be accepted if you do not consult theologians.”
Does that apply to your definition for en (‘in’) and hn (‘was’) which theologians define differently (Q&A Forum - ‘Can 3 Persons Be One God?’)?
And considering John 1 (for future reference), do you agree with the following theologians concerning
theos/
elohim (a
god/
gods)?
The
NIV Study Bible, Zondervan, 1985, says about ‘
gods’:
"In the language of the OT ... rulers and judges, as deputies of the heavenly King, could be given the honorific title ‘
god’ ... or be called ‘
son of God’.” - footnote for Ps. 82:1.
And, in the footnote for Ps. 45:6, this trinitarian study Bible tells us: “In this psalm, which praises the [Israelite] king ..., it is not unthinkable that he was called ‘
god’ as a title of honor (cf. Isa. 9:6).”
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, tells us:
“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.... 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.
The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia
explains that
elohim [‘god, gods’] is, of course, applied to God. But it is also applied “to those who
represent the Deity (Jgs
5 8; Ps
82 1) ...” - p. 1265, Vol. 2, Eerdmans, 1984 printing.
W. E. Vine tells us:
“The word [
theos, ‘god’ or ‘God’] is used of Divinely appointed judges in Israel, as
representing God in His authority, John 10:34” - p. 491,
An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.
And
Barnes’ Notes tells us in commenting on John 10:34, 35:
The scripture cannot be broken. See Matthew 5:19. The authority of the Scripture is final; it cannot be set aside. The meaning is,
'If, therefore, the Scripture uses the word "god" as applied to magistrates, it settles the question that it is right to apply the term to those in office and authority. If applied to them, it may be to others in similar offices. It can not, therefore, be blasphemy to use this word as applicable to a personage so much more exalted than mere magistrates as the Messiah.' -
Barnes' Notes on the New Testament.
Young’s
Analytical Concordance of the Bible, Eerdmans, 1978 Reprint, “Hints and Helps to Bible Interpretation”:
“65. GOD - is used of any one (professedly) MIGHTY, whether truly so or not, and is applied not only to the true God, but to false gods,
magistrates,
judges,
angels,
prophets, etc., e.g. - Exod. 7:1; 15:11; 21:6; 22:8, 9;...Ps. 8:5; 45:6; 82:1, 6; 97:7, 9...John 1:1; 10:33, 34, 35; 20:28....”
The New Brown-
Driver-
Briggs-
Gesenius Hebrew-
English Lexicon, 1979, Hendrickson, p. 43:
Elohim: “a.
rulers,
judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power.... b.
divine ones, superhuman beings
including God and angels.... c.
angels Ps. 97:7...”
Angels are clearly called gods (
elohim) at Ps. 8:5, 6. We know this because this passage is quoted at Heb. 2:6, 7, and there the word “
angels” is used (in place of
elohim in the OT) in NT Greek. The
New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., 1970, says in a footnote for Ps. 8:6 -
“The angels: in Hebrew,
elohim, which is the ordinary word for ‘God’ or ‘
the gods’; hence the ancient versions generally understood the term as referring to heavenly spirits [angels].”
Some of these trinitarian sources which admit that the Bible actually describes men who represent God (judges, Israelite kings, etc.) and God’s angels as
gods include:
1.
Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Bible, “Hints and Helps...,” Eerdmans, 1978 reprint;
2
. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #430, Hebrew & Chaldee Dict., Abingdon, 1974;
3
. New Bible Dictionary, p. 1133, Tyndale House Publ., 1984;
4.
Today’s Dictionary of the Bible, p. 208, Bethany House Publ., 1982;
5.
Hastings’ A Dictionary of the Bible, p. 217, Vol. 2;
6
. The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, p. 43, Hendrickson publ.,1979;
7.
Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, #2316 (4.), Thayer, Baker Book House, 1984 printing;
8
. The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, p. 132, Vol. 1; & p. 1265, Vol. 2, Eerdmans, 1984;
9
. The NIV Study Bible, footnotes for Ps. 45:6; Ps. 82:1, 6; & Jn 10:34; Zondervan, 1985;
10
. New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., footnote for Ps. 45:7, 1970 ed.;
11. A. T. Robertson,
Word Pictures, Vol. 5, pp. 188-189;
12. William G. T. Shedd,
Dogmatic Theology, Vol. 1, pp. 317, 324, Nelson Publ., 1980 printing;
13. Murray J. Harris,
Jesus As God, p. 202, Baker Book House, 1992;
14. William Barclay,
The Gospel of John, V. 2, Daily Study Bible Series, pp. 77, 78, Westminster Press, 1975;
15.
The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible (John 10:34 & Ps. 82:6);
16.
The Fourfold Gospel (Note for John 10:35);
17.
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Jamieson, Fausset, Brown
(John 10:34-36);
18.
Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible (Ps. 82:6-8 and John 10:35);
19.
John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible (Ps. 82:1).
20.
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament ('Little Kittel'), - p. 328, Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1985.
21.
The Expositor’s Greek Testament, pp. 794-795, Vol. 1, Eerdmans Publishing Co.
22
. The Amplified Bible, Ps. 82:1, 6 and John 10:34, 35, Zondervan Publ., 1965.
23.
Barnes' Notes on the New Testament, John 10:34, 35.
24. B. W. Johnson's
People's New Testament, John 10:34-36.
(also John 10:34, 35 -
CEV: TEV; GodsWord; The Message; NLT; NIRV;
And, of course the popular Jewish writer, Philo, had the same understanding for “God”/“a god” about the same time the NT was being written.
And the earliest Christians like the highly respected NT scholar Origen and others - - including Tertullian; Justin Martyr; Hippolytus; Clement of Alexandria; Theophilus; the writer of “The Epistle to Diognetus”; and even super-trinitarians Athanasius and St. Augustine - - also had this understanding for “a god.” And, as we saw above, many highly respected NT scholars of this century agree.
All of this shows the scriptural understanding (as well as the same understanding by Christian writers of the first centuries) of “god” as applied to angels and certain men who were trying to follow God or who were representatives or ambassadors for God. Just because it sounds strange to our modern ears is no reason to ignore the facts. And no reason to take advantage of that fact by claiming that only two understandings of the words theos and elohim are possible: “God” and “false gods.”
The words elohim and theos are simply titles or descriptions (like “lord”) signifying more than usual power, might, authority, etc. It may be applied on many levels. But when it is applied on the highest (“Most High”) level it is understood in an exclusive sense: there is no other individual that is even remotely equal to this one. This does not mean that the same title, description is not used for lesser ones. To distinguish, when there could be confusion, the Most High God will usually be described as “the god” (ha elohim, Heb. or ho theos, Gk.) which, when translated into modern English will be distinguished by a capital letter (“God”) since in our idiom we seldom use the definite article with “God.”
Any cut-and-paste material is from my own original files. These files which I have originated have also been posted at numerous places on-line at various times over the past 15 years.
