Romans 9:5 - Benjamin Hall Kennedy on early ECW

Steven Avery

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

One of the few to mention Theodoret, maybe Mopsuestia, should be in GIfford and Burgon.
(Correction below: Theodore of Cyrus)

Irenaeus Tertullian Cyprian Novatians -
Antiochene Epistle to Paul of Samasota
Hippolytus condems Noetus 3.6 for identity
Rufinus Origen


1636667453694.png


1636667621970.png
 
Last edited:

Brianrw

Member
In the note about the versions, the statement of ambiguity above is not accurate.

One of the few to mention Theodoret, maybe Mopseustia
It's Theodoret of Cyrus, to be distinguished from Theodore (no t) of Mopsuestia.

Hippolytus condems Noetus 3.6 for identity

Hippolytus (170-235)​

Hippolytus does not condemn Noetus for "identity," but for using Romans 9:5 to claim the Son was the Father. Hippolytus himself uses the same passage, but expounds it thus against the heretic, "'He who is over all is God; for thus He [Jesus] speaks boldly, 'All things are delivered unto me of my Father.' He who is over all, God blessed, has been born; and having been made man, He is (yet) God for ever." (Against Noetus, 6)

Tertullian (155-222), Latin​

I shall follow the apostle; so that if the Father and the Son, are alike to be invoked, I shall call the Father God, and invoke Jesus Christ as Lord. But when Christ alone (is mentioned), I shall be able to call Him God, as the same apostle says: Of whom is Christ, who is over all, God blessed for ever. For I should give the name of sun even to a sunbeam, considered in itself; but if I were mentioning the sun from which the ray emanates, I certainly should at once withdraw the name of sun from the mere beam. For although I make not two suns, still I shall reckon both the sun and its ray to be as much two things and two forms of one undivided substance, as God and His Word, as the Father and the Son. (Against Praxeas)

Origen (184-253), Latin

Commentary on Romans 9:5, Latin translation of Rufinus - It is clear from this passage that Christ is the "God who is over all." The one who is over all has nothing over him, for Christ does not come after the Father but from the Father. The Holy Spirit is also included in this, as it is written: "The Spirit of the Lord fills the earth, and whoever contains all things knows every sound." So if the Son is God over all and the Spirit is recorded as containing all things, it is clear that the nature and substance of the Trinity are shown to be one and over all things.

Novatian (200-258)​

The Apostle Thomas, convinced at last by all the proofs of His Godhead, and by the facts, makes the response to Christ, "My Lord and my God." The Apostle Paul writes in his epistle, "Of whom are the fathers, and of whom Christ came according to the flesh, who is God over all, blessed forever," writing in his epistles; and if the same apostle declares that he was ordained an apostle not by men, nor of man, but by Jesus Christ; and if the same contends that he learned the Gospel not from men or by man, but received it from Jesus Christ, reasonably Christ is God. (On the Trinity, 13)

Cyprian of Carthage (210-258), Latin​

In a section dealing with passages that speak of Christ as God:
Also in the Gospel according to John: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and God was the Word.” Also in the same: “The Lord said to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands: and be not faithless, but believing. Thomas answered and said unto Him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto him, Because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they who have not seen, and yet have believed.” Also Paul to the Romans: “I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren and my kindred according to the flesh: who are Israelites: whose are the adoption, and the glory, and the covenant, and the appointment of the law, and the service (of God), and the promises; whose are the fathers, of whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is God over all, blessed for evermore.” (Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews, 2.6)

Theodoret of Cyrus (393-460)​

  1. He calls the same both Jesus Christ, and Son of David, and Son of God, as God and Lord of all, and yet in the middle of his epistle, after making mention of the Jews, he adds, "whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all God blessed for ever, amen." Here he says that He who according to the flesh derived His descent from the Jews is eternal God and is praised by the right minded as Lord of all created things. The same teaching is given us in the Apostle's words to the excellent Titus Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ. Here he calls the same both Saviour, and great God, and Jesus Christ. (Letters, 146)

  2. In like manner also the divine apostle in his Epistle to the Romans bewailing the change to the worse of the ancient felicity of the Jews, and calling to mind their divine promises and legislation, goes on to say “Whose are the fathers, and of whom concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all God blessed for ever Amen,” and in this same passage he exhibits Him both as Creator of all things and Lord and Ruler as God and as sprung from the Jews as man. (Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed, Dialogue 1)
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
Hippolytus (170-235)
Hippolytus does not condemn Noetus for "identity," but for using Romans 9:5 to claim the Son was the Father. Hippolytus himself uses the same passage, but expounds it thus against the heretic, "'He who is over all is God; for thus He [Jesus] speaks boldly, 'All things are delivered unto me of my Father.' He who is over all, God blessed, has been born; and having been made man, He is (yet) God for ever." (Against Noetus, 6)

The whole section is interesting, and you miss a lot without the full context.
Here is a simple point.

If the text says that Jesus is "God blessed" then it is not saying that Jesus is God, blessed for ever.

"He who is overall, God blessed"


So above Hippolytus is giving two differing readings of the text, the second one matching the AV.

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

Hippolytus, 170-236 A.D., Dogmatical and Historical Fragments – Against the Heresy of One Noetus,[6]
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/li...ments-part-ii-dogmatical-and-historical-11430
https://books.google.com/books?id=dr1JAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA1-PA57

1637199196107.png

1637199242722.png


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.”,13 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.” 14 He who is overall, 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.” 15 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; ”16 and Christ rules all things, and has been appointed 17 Almighty by the Father. ...
 
Last edited:

Brianrw

Member
So Hippolytus is giving two differing readings of the text.
No, he's not. He's expounding the passage in such a way to confute the patripassion heresy of Noetus. He is very clear that the passage speaks of Christ as "God." As I've said many times, you cannot understand the passage in the sense of "blessed by God" out of the Greek text. You'd have to change the construction from a noun and an adjective to a noun and a verb. Even in English, the hyphen would be necessary (i.e. God-blessed). But even then, it would be a hyphenated form of a noun and a verb. Any basics of Greek grammar will show you that. I've even quoted one for you from Mounce, but you just called it "wrong."
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
No, he's not. He's overlapping the clauses using "God," to confute the patripassion heresy of Noetus. As I've said many times, you cannot understand the passage in the sense of "blessed by God" out of the Greek text. You'd have to change the construction from a noun and an adjective to a noun and a verb. Even in English, the hyphen would be necessary in order to treat that portion of the text as an adjective. Even then, it would be a hyphenated form of a noun and a verb.

So you are accusing your English text of being a mistranslation. hmmmm ... doubtful.
You are wrong about the supposed hyphen need ... again.

And it does NOT say "He who is overall, God, blessed"
Your retranslation.

As for Noetus, since you believe the GSR texts say Christ is God, you are saying he is God but not the Father?
Which God is he?

Did you notice how Granville Sharp panicked when he found one of his verses, Jude 4, might be too Sabellian? He stuck with it anyway.

Do you agree with Sharp here? p. 65-66
https://books.google.com/books?id=e1oXAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA65

three Divine Persons are really revealed to us under the title of Jehovah in the Old Testament, and under the title of
1637203018617.png
or God, in the New Testament; and that the supreme attributes of the DIVINE NATURE are applied to each, in both Testaments.

1637203226964.png

This means that each divine person is the Great God, including the Holy Spirit.
Do you agree with Sharp that the Holy Spirit is the Great God?
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
First hyphen - c . AD 1620.

Generally, you need the hyphen only if the two words are functioning together as an adjective before the noun they're describing. If the noun comes first, leave the hyphen out.

Christ comes before God blessed. No hyphen.
 

Brianrw

Member
First hyphen - c . AD 1620.
Last revision of the AV - 1769. But this point is moot. I consulted an English grammarian on this and they were very clear that either the words be hyphenated, or the meaning of the final clause (in English) is that God (subject) blessed (verb) for ever (predicate), so that it is eternity that is blessed. No matter how you bend the English, no one entertains your interpretation of it because the Greek text (θεὸς εὐλογητὸς) can't form that type of construction. It won't even register as a possibility.

Generally, you need the hyphen only if the two words are functioning together as an adjective before the noun they're describing. If the noun comes first, leave the hyphen out.
  1. The Greek θεὸς ("God") is a noun and εὐλογητὸς ("blessed") is an adjective. An adjective describes a noun, that noun here is θεὸς, thus the one who is blessed (in the sense of "magnified, praised, extalted") is θεὸς, "God." That is the "natural connection" Harris was referring to, and a first semester Greek student would recognize that so it doesn't need to be explained. θεὸς is a predicate of ὁ ὢν ("who is"), and ὁ ὢν ("who is") refers back to "Christ," thus Christ in this passage is referred to as θεὸς. That is, Christ is "over all," is "God," and is "blessed for ever."

  2. A Greek adjective does not translate as an English verb. If you want it to read "God blessed," as in "blessed by God," "God" would be a noun and "blessed" a verb ("blessed"). This results in a construction that essentially reads, without any external clarification, "God (subject) blessed (verb) for ever (predicate)." Thus I say, it's bad English and you would have to change the Greek text.

So you are accusing your English text of being a mistranslation. hmmmm ... doubtful.
You are wrong about the supposed hyphen need ... again.

And it does NOT say "He who is overall, God, blessed"
Your retranslation.
No. I'm saying you're reading it wrong. Phonetically, not "God blest," (verb pronunciation) but "God ˈble-səd," (adjective pronunciation) as in "tis more blessed (ˈble-səd) to give than receive."

If you don't want to listen to me, Cf. e.g. Matthew Henry, "Mentioning Christ, he interposes a very great word concerning him, that he is over all, God blessed for ever. Lest the Jews should think meanly of him, because he was of their alliance, he here speaks thus honourably concerning him: and it is a very full proof of the Godhead of Christ; he is not only over all, as Mediator, but he is God blessed for ever."

As for Noetus, since you believe the GSR texts say Christ is God, you are saying he is God but not the Father?
I don't know why you refuse to read these passages correctly. This isn't even a "GSR" text. Noetus abused the passage, saying that where it calls Christ "God over all," it is proof that the Son is also the Father. I myself am a Trinitarian. Three persons, one God. The Son is not the Father and is not the Spirit.

He who is overall, God blessed, has been born; and having been made man. He is (yet) God for ever.' For to this effect John also has said,
You've merged "over all" into "overall" in two places above and instead of a comma after "man" you've typed a period. The text reads "He who is over all, God blessed, has been born; and having been made man, He is (yet) God for ever." Thus he explains the passage.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Last revision of the AV - 1769. But this point is moot. I consulted an English grammarian on this and they were very clear that either the words be hyphenated, or the meaning of the final clause (in English) is that God (subject) blessed (verb) for ever (predicate), so that it is eternity that is blessed. No matter how you bend the English, no one entertains your interpretation of it because the Greek text (θεὸς εὐλογητὸς) can't form that type of construction. It won't even register as a possibility.

There was AV revision through the 1800s, we can consider the Pure Cambridge Edition of the early 1900s the set text. Corrections - hyphens were in the compound names of the AV, even with Jehovah.

William Sherlock and his reviewer explained (θεὸς εὐλογητὸς) properly, that is a new post in the Trichotomy thread.

=========

Thanks for the two corrections to my earlier iPad posting.
”Overall” is very different. This comes up in a Quora discussion, which I may add here in the AM. “over all God” is a mess, and the AV correctly stays with the Greek word order, and properly keeps God in its natural association with blessed.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
”Overall” is very different. This comes up in a Quora discussion, which I may add here in the AM. “over all God” is a mess, and the AV correctly stays with the Greek word order, and properly keeps God in its natural association with blessed.

Not Quora, a different discussion spot.

Hermenutics Stack Exchange
Does Romans 9:5 refers to Jesus as God? [duplicate]

"Who is over all God..."? That doesn't even make sense. It would actually change from "over all" (preposition + determiner/pronoun) to "overall" (adjective) in order to fit the sentence grammar--and still it would have an awkward meaning in this context. If he were "overall" God, what would He be the rest of the time? Sorry, but, I don't accept this explanation which does obvious violence to the grammar and meaning of this Bible verse.
Polyhat Oct 8, 2021

This is why those intent on changing the Authroized Version sense have to change the word order, or change the text, such as placing a comma after God, and trying to make it 3 descriptions of Christ, rather than the natural sense of two. And it still is awkward after their mangling.

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

He is right.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
I consulted an English grammarian on this and they were very clear that either the words be hyphenated, or the meaning of the final clause (in English) is that God (subject) blessed (verb) for ever (predicate), so that it is eternity that is blessed.

So you have a new rather wacky interpretation that does not match any known ECW or commentator.

And your grammarian, he saw and accepted the comma before "God blessed for ever"? Or was he isolating the phrase, leading to contextual loss?

And you do not mention him say that in the English, it means Christ is God. ooppsss. Better change your AV! (sarcasm alert).

Did he complain about the grammar?

Problems on the right, problems on the left.
 
Last edited:

Brianrw

Member
So you have a new rather wacky interpretation that does not match any known ECW or commentator.
No, I asked if your reading was possible from that English construction.

They said, emphatically, "no."

I asked "why?"

They said if you don't hyphenate the noun and verb construct, "God" would be a noun, "blessed" would be the verb, and "for ever" would receive the action of the verb. They also said, as I have already, that it would be very bad and awkward English. They didn't say that's how the passage would be read. I affirmed, "I mean God blessed in the sense of I am so God blessed." They said yes, it would be a noun and a verb, but it would need to be hyphenated. That way it would function as an adjective.

When I said "blessed" was an adjective in Greek, they said then it must be pronounced like an adjective: ble-səd, not blest, as the verb is pronounced.

You still have missed this one most basic point:

Adjectives in Greek do not become verbs in English.​


William Sherlock and his reviewer explained (θεὸς εὐλογητὸς) properly, that is a new post in the Trichotomy thread.
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...nitarian-errors-on-both-sides.2285/#post-8868

William Sherlock testifies that in this passage, Paul "assures us also, that he is God" and that this text proves "the Eternal Godhead of our Saviour," and that the passage says of Christ that "he is over all; that he is God, that he is blessed."​

I have cautioned many times against reading your ideas into the texts you are producing. No one who knows Greek or comments on it would even think to understand the passage in the way you do, it is a noun and an adjective, not a noun and a verb. All the more reason to read through the entire argument where he expounds the passage at the end of the thought on p. 39:

Though he is a Man by his Natural Descent from Abraham and David, he [Paul] assures us also, That he is God; and that we may not suspect that he means only a Titular God, a God by Dignity and Office, not by Nature ; he gives him that known Title of the Supreme God, That he is God Blessed, God whose Name is the Blessed. (p. 37)​

And on p. 38, he says,

...the Blessed One is the Blessed God, that alone were a sufficient Proof of the Eternal Godhead of Christ."​

Against the Socninian appeal that "God" is missing in some quotations of certain Fathers (Cyprian, Hilary, Chrysostom, who we now know did indeed read as we do), he writes,

...all the rest of the Fathers own it, and these very Fathers prove from this very Text, the Eternal Godhead of our Saviour; and therefore it is most probable did read the words as we do. (p. 38)​

He goes to conclude,

...let any Man try, whether he can invent more express Words, to signify the Eternal Godhead of our Saviour by, and judge of the incorrigible Perverseness of those Men, whom the most plain and express Words cannot convince. (p.39)​
I also couldn't ask for a better witness on what I have been saying, among the English commentators, as he writes on p. 38 what I have said to you many other times already the passage signifies:

For it says no more of Christ, than what is said in other Places of Scripture: As, that he is over all; that he is God; that he is the Blessed.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
No, I asked if your reading was possible from that English construction.

They said, emphatically, "no."

I asked "why?"

They said if you don't hyphenate the noun and verb construct, "God" would be a noun, "blessed" would be the verb, and "for ever" would receive the action of the verb. They also said, as I have already, that it would be very bad and awkward English. They didn't say that's how the passage would be read. I affirmed, "I mean God blessed in the sense of I am so God blessed." They said yes, it would be a noun and a verb, but it would need to be hyphenated. That way it would function as an adjective.

When I said "blessed" was an adjective in Greek, they said then it must be pronounced like an adjective: ble-səd, not blest, as the verb is pronounced.

Your English grammarian showed you hyphenated noun-adjective forms in the AV English?

(If not, then it is obviously a worthless analysis. If yes, let's see and continue on.)
 

Brianrw

Member
Your English grammarian showed you hyphenated noun-adjective forms in the AV English?

(If not, then it is obviously a worthless analysis. If yes, let's see and continue on.)
They described it very simply. "God blessed," they said, as in "blessed by God" would be a noun and a verb. They said if you don't hyphenate the words, so that they function as an adjective (i.e., before the noun), that the construction would be saying, essentially, that God has blessed eternity. That is not how they understood the passage itself, nor is it how I understand it. They also said that would be bad English, that such a construction should just be written, "blessed by God."

I then told them the Greek "blessed" was an adjective. They said then you have to pronounce it bles-sed to distinguish it from the verb, which is pronounced blest.

Quite simply, by equivocating over the word "blessed" (altering through expression bless-sed, adjective, to blest, verb), you are corrupting the reading through exposition. The Greek can't be read like English, there is no equivalent construction, and a verb in Greek cannot be taken into English as a verb.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
(you typo again- an adjective in Greek, last line)

You acknowledge God-blessed is an adjectival unit.

This is == to the AV text.
The AV does not require a hyphen there.

Very simple.
 

Brianrw

Member
(you typo again- an adjective in Greek, last line)

You acknowledge God-blessed is an adjectival unit.

This is == to the AV text.

Very simple.
The construct you note requires a hyphen, that's what joins the noun and verb together to function as an adjective. An adjectival phrase requires an adjective, and there is no adjectival phrase when there is no adjective. A noun and verb together do not form adjectival phrases, except hyphenated.

Even then, there is absolutely no equivalent construction in Greek, you would have to employ a verb. In Greek, the adjective is in the predicate position, which describes the subject, and that subject is Christ. "God" is a predicate nominative dependent on "who is." A predicate nominative renames the subject, and that subject is Christ.

This is all basic, very basic grammar. You're being incredibly stubborn and I won't continue arguing in circles with you much longer. As I said, feel free to ask around about the Greek, just don't expect it to end well for your argument.

I'd really like you to explain the Greek to me, in your own words, how you can make such a construction out of that passage ( Χριστὸς . . . ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς εὐλογητὸς). You have your opportunity below:​

 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
The stubborn one, Brian is you, claiming that, in our construction.

God-blessed ... is adjectival
God blessed ... can not be adjectival, it must be noun verb.

You have lost the thread.
Your claim is not true for modern English, and most definitely can not be retrofit on the pure Bible English of the AV.

=========

“Generally, you need the hyphen only if the two words are functioning together as an adjective before the noun they're describing. If the noun comes first, leave the hyphen out. This wall is load bearing. It's impossible to eat this cake because it is rock hard.”

Grammarly
Hyphen
https://www.grammarly.com/blog/hyphen/

==========

Christ is God blessed.
You are welcome to pronounce blessed as two syllables, as a purist.

Maybe you and your grammarian need a refresher course?

==========
 
Last edited:

Brianrw

Member
No. You've lost the thread, and you don't even seem to realize why, because you don't know the Greek and have no idea how to justify your reading by it.

Let's say I be gracious and concede your point about the hyphen, that the two words together function as a single predicate adjective describing Christ. In Greek, "God" is a predicate nominative and "blessed" is a predicate adjective. Both, individually, refer back to the subject (Christ). If you describe "God blessed" as two words acting as an adjective in English, when there is no corresponding construction in Greek, you've essentially obliterated the underlying predicate nominative. However, you should review the grammar rules more carefully, before stating I need to brush up.

The underlying Greek for the interpretation you propose would be ευλογημένος από τον Θεόν.

Again, please explain the Greek below, since you make a pretense of knowing it better than I:​

 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Let's say I be gracious and concede your point about the hyphen, that the two words together function as a single predicate adjective describing Christ. In Greek, "God" is a predicate nominative and "blessed" is a predicate adjective. Both, individually, refer back to the subject (Christ). If you describe "God blessed" as two words acting as an adjective in English,

Sticking with the English of our AV first, that is a good start!

Add “informed” and “practical” to “gracious”. :)
 

Brianrw

Member
In other words, you can't, and it doesn't seem to matter to you that English and Greek don't line up in meaning?

So, it's ok to bring the passage into English as one thing, but through improper accent to expound it as another?

You've lost Harris as your foundation, who you thought agreed with you, and the evidence from the English commentators here together with the Greek writers as far back as we have record is very problematic for your assertion.

I also noticed this gem elsewhere:
God blessed is an adjectival phrase, or unit, to Christ. For ever is adverbial.
So "God blessed" is an adjective, but is described with an adverb? "Forever" here, both in Greek and English, is a noun! You can't stop changing the function of the words in the English sentence, can you?

Good attempt to deflect. I'm seriously waiting for your (substantive and "informed") answer on how your English interpretation in any way, shape, or form matches the Greek:​

 
Last edited:

Brianrw

Member
(cont'd from previous post) I'll even make it easy for you:

ὁ Χριστὸς (subject, articular, "Christ") . . . ὁ ὢν (participle, "who is") . . . θεὸς (predicate nominative, "God"-->ὁ ὢν-->ὁ Χριστὸς) εὐλογητὸς (predicate adjective, "blessed"-->ὁ ὢν-->ὁ Χριστὸς) εἰς (preposition, "unto/for,") τοὺς αἰῶνας (noun, "the ages/forever") ἀμήν.​

Don't follow English construction rules. Follow Greek, and refute this below (if you are right, it should be easy):​

 
Last edited:
Top