Romans 9:5 - awkward and unlikely word order to say Christ is God - ECW Eusebius and Noetus & Praxeas from Hippolytus - natural association

[Steven Avery]

The AV follows the Greek word order.

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.

Those who want to correct the AV look at it this way.

Christ came,
(Christ) who is over all
(Christ is) God
(Christ is) blessed for ever

This is awkward in many ways.

However, if the purpose of Paul was to say Christ is God he could write this much clearer, e.g "θεὸς ἐπὶ πάντων " (similar to Eusebius) rather than "ἐπὶ πάντων "θεὸς "

Christ came,
(Christ) who is God over all
(Christ) blessed for ever

Then there would be hardly any punctuation issues.
However Paul was definitely not saying that Christ is God, over all.

 

[Steven Avery]

Ecclesiastical History - Book XIII
https://books.google.com/books?id=XvhiAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA30

Eusebius of Caesarea: Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Tr. E.H. Gifford (1903) -- Book 1
https://www.tertullian.org/fathers/eusebius_pe_01_book1.htm
Chapter 3

For through Him multitudes from every race of mankind turned away from the delusion of idols, and embraced the true knowledge and worship of Him who is God over all, wellnigh ratifying the oracles of men of old, and especially that one which by Jeremy the prophet said 'O Lord my God, unto Thee shall the nations come from the ends of the earth, and shall say, Our fathers inherited false idols, and there was no profit in them. Shall a man make unto himself gods, which yet are no gods?'

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

Ecclesiastical History
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/church-history-books-viix-11518

CHAPTER XVII: The Signs at Paneas of the Great Might of our Saviour.

Among these is also the following wonder. At Caesarea Philippi, which the Phoenicians call Paneas,(1) springs are shown at the foot of the Mountain Panius, out of which the Jordan flows. They say that on a certain feast day, a victim was thrown in, (2) and that through the power of the demon it marvelously disappeared and that which happened was a famous wonder to those who were present. Astyrius was once there when these things were done, and seeing the multitude astonished at the affair, he pitied their delusion; and looking up to heaven he supplicated the God over all through Christ, that he would rebuke the demon who deceived the people, and bring the men's delusion to an end. And they say that when he had prayed thus, immediately the sacrifice floated on the surface of the fountain. And thus the miracle departed; and no wonder was ever afterward performed at the place.

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

https://mb-soft.com/believe/txub/eusebiud.htm
14. For, finally, he reached such a pitch of madness that he attacked the bishops, supposing that they--as servants of the God over all--would be hostile to his measures. He did not yet proceed against them openly, on account of his fear of his superior, but as before, secretly and craftily, employing the treachery of the governors for the destruction of the most distinguished of them. And the manner of their murder was strange, and such as had never before been heard of.

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

Schaff - Noetus .. is this Hippolytus?
https://books.google.com/books?id=8nlbAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA291
https://books.google.com/books?id=uq3oDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT1046

 

[Steven Avery]

​

Hippolytus and Noetus on Romans 9:5 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 Quote: 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. Quote: 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.” Quote: 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 maybe a bit more specific research and searching will help, quite a topic!

 

[Brianrw]

However, if the purpose of Paul was to say Christ is God he could write this much clearer, e.g "θεὸς ἐπὶ πάντων " (similar to Eusebius) rather than "ἐπὶ πάντων "θεὸς "

There would be nothing awkward in ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων Θεὸς being translated "God over all." You should stick to the English, otherwise those who do understand the Greek language will call you out every time. Greek is a highly inflected language, unlike English. The issue with the word order in Romans 9:5 is not as you state it, but has to do with the position of the adjective after Θεὸς.

Eusebius' frequent usage of ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων Θεὸς (rather than, as you say, θεὸς ἐπὶ πάντων), "(the) God over all," is well known. Could you supply the reference for the Greek text you provide?

There are only ten books in Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, I believe your reference here is mistaken?

Those who want to correct the AV look at it this way.

Christ came,
(Christ) who is over all
(Christ is) God
(Christ is) blessed for ever

Nothing to "correct"​

The AV already testifies of all those things, so there is nothing to "correct." For example, William Sherlock (1706), whom you hastily produced thinking he interpreted the passage the same as you, writes that Romans 9:5 (AV reading), "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.” (p. 38) I have more than 60 authors from the 1600s and 1700s that say Paul calls Christ "God" here, and I'm literally running out of books to search from that period.

Long before the AV even existed, Zechariah of Mitelyne, a Greek author of the 6th century, expounds it essentially the same way:

Paul also . . . said of Him, 'Who is over all,' to proclaim Him Lord of created things; he said of Him, 'Who is God,' that we should not be drawn aside by the outward appearance and sufferings so as to deny his incorruptible Nature; he said of Him, 'blessed,' that we should worship Him as the Ruler of all, and not regard Him as a fellow-slave; he said of Him, 'Who is for ever,' to show that it is He Who by His word created all things, visible and invisible, whereby His Godhead is glorified. We have, then, Christ Who is God over all..." (The Syriac Chronicle, 2.5)​

​

Again, stating the proper interpretation of the passage as it stands in the AV is not correcting the AV, it is correcting your interpretation. These are the interpretations handed down to be safeguarded by the Orthodox, not abandoned to the enemies of Christ.

 

[Steven Avery]

There would be nothing awkward in ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων Θεὸς being translated "God over all." You should stick to the English, otherwise those who do understand the Greek language will call you out every time. Greek is a highly inflected language, unlike English. The issue with the word order in Romans 9:5 is not as you state it, but has to do with the position of the adjective after Θεὸς.

It is awkward because the actual phrase is Christ, who is over all.

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.

You have to leave out the actual subject, Christ, to make your awkward claim, and to mangle a simple construction shown in the AV.

There is NO "who is" or "he is" before God.

If Paul wanted to say Christ ... who is God, he could easily have put in those words

 

[Steven Avery]

William Sherlock (1706), whom you hastily produced thinking he interpreted the passage the same as you,

Nope. I knew he was problematic, and even a tritheist. Thus, I did not quote his writing.

However, his Reviewer wrote excellently.

Try not to accuse falsely. Thanks!

 

[Steven Avery]

Zechariah of Mitelyne, a Greek author of the 6th century

The normative spellings are Mytilene and Mitylene

Zacharias Rhetor

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zacharias_Rhetor

aka Zacharias Scholasticus or Zacharias Rhetor,

A nice Greek allusion to the heavenly witnesses.

Zacharias Rhetor - c. 500 AD Greek - O Father, and Word, and Holy Ghost ... threefold and holy unity
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...-and-holy-ghost-threefold-and-holy-unity.404/

 

[Brianrw]

If Paul wanted to say Christ ... who is God, he could easily have put in those words

He does. Your champion Harris, who you think is on your side but is not in this place, unambiguously states that "God" in "God blessed forever" is a second predicate (i.e. nominative) to "who is." A predicate nominative renames the subject. He's telling you in the reading "God blessed forever," Christ is being called "God." The first predicate is "over all." Thus "Christ . . . who is over all" and "Christ . . . who is . . . God" are the two predicates he notes. "Blessed" is a predicate adjective, which also describes the subject. You keep thinking by "natural connection" he means Christ is "Blessed by God." That's not how the adjectives work in Greek. It means Christ, who is God, is the one blessed.

Before God, I keep telling you the truth but you have not believed me. That is not my problem. But you have a bigger problem, now that you've been corrected after a second and third admonition yet refuse to hear it.

 

[Steven Avery]

Your champion Harris, who you think is on your side but is not in this place, unambiguously states that "God" in "God blessed forever" is a second predicate (i.e. nominative) to "who is."

That does not apply to his #5.

And if that is his favored explanation, since he acknowledges multiple possible interpretations, Murray Harris should explain why Paul did not simply include the two words that would have made it the one and only understanding.

This type of question arises frequently, as in 1 Timothy 3:16. If they really thought God was not there, why not write in a sensible, clear manner. Similar with the heavenly witnesses and many, many other verses.

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

This is the page that could use a pic on second predicate
https://books.google.com/books?id=U9VLAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA166

Not a few scholars who find a reference to Christ in Romans 9:5b, construe θεὸς with ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων,79 “(Christ,) who is God over all.” Alternatively, θεὸς could be taken as being in apposition to ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων (Prümm 140) “(Christ, ) who, as God, is/rules over all.”80 Both of these constructions sever the natural association of θεὸς with εὐλογητὸς and cohere better with the word order ὁ ὢν θεὸς ἐπὶ πάντων. Also, as Cranfield notes (Romans 469), if Paul had said that Christ is “God over all,” he could have been misunderstood to suggest “that Christ is God to the exclusion of, or in superiority over, the Father."

79. Olshausen 326; Philippi 68; B. Weiss, Theology 1:393 and n. 5; Alford 2:405; Schlatter,
Gerechtigkeit 295; Nygren 358; Faccio 110, 135; O. Michel, Römer 229. See also table 4, no. 6.

80. Cf. Cassirer: “(Christ...,) he who rules as God over all things.”

=====================================
Oops. You were not accurate and honest with the Murray Harris position.

He adopts a view that makes Qeoc a second predicate to "who is", he does not declare that this is mandated in any way, as a supposed "unambiguous" fact.

Please be more careful in your assertions, and try not to misrepresent. This is another example of playing fast and loose with the grammar, as with your assertions that Christ and God are in apposition. Which is your preferred conclusion, but not at all mandated by the text.

Thanks!

 

[Brianrw]

Oops. You were not accurate and honest with the Murray Harris position.

What Harris is saying​

I was indeed both honest and accurate with Harris' position, you on the other hand have distorted the meaning, omitted words, and failed to disclose relevant context. Go see the first sentence of his discussion point 5 on p. 160, and especially the 2nd paragraph on p. 163. There, he's already established the point that that "εὐλογητὸς after ὁ ὢν" means, I quote "Christ (' . . . who is . . . blessed for ever')." As I said, a predicate adjective describes the subject.

Under point 6, he then goes on to refer to θεὸς ("God") on p. 166 in the AV style translation as a "second predicate dependent on ὁ ὢν" (who is), meaning that it refers back to ὁ Χριστὸς ("Christ"). A predicate nominative renames the subject, which is Christ. In other words, "Christ . . . who is . . . God" is the one who is blessed.

Both of Harris' preferred translation utilize the English construction "God blessed forever." He notes that one of the options is predicative (i.e., the AV style reading), and the other is appositional. He prefers the appositional reading. However, in the paragraph after (which you exclude from your snippet), he notes that "appositional (or predicative)," θεὸς in the passage "functions as a qualitative noun, highlighting Christ's inherent Divinity."

Harris then goes on to conclude, p. 167, that "In Romans 9:5b one may isolate three distinct affirmations about Christ: he is Lord of all, he is God by nature, and he will be eternally praised. But as they are stated by Paul, these three affirmations are interrelated."

 

[Steven Avery]

Answered here
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...ist-and-god-are-in-apposition.2311/#post-8978

Your original “unambiguously states“ remains wrong,

 

[Oseas]

The Word is GOD.

Concerning the flesh JESUS came from the fathers, like the kinsmen of Paul and ALL Israelites, JESUS is even over the fathers, He is greater than the fathers, God blessed for ever, amen, or, so be it.

Paul preached saying " JESUS being in the form of GOD, thought it not robbery to be equal with GOD-(Phi.2:v.6):

Paul , even him, wrote: When all things shall be subdued unto JESUS, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put ALL things under him, that God may be ALL in ALL. 1 Cor.15:v.28

And John Apostle preached: 1 John 5:v.19-20
19 We know that we are of GOD, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.
20 And we know that the Son of GOD is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in Him that is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

1John 5:v.7 -There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit (which is not a Ghost as is written in English LANGUAGE, but a Person): and these three are One. THREE DIVINE AND DISTINCTS PERSONS . The third is the god of the earth -Revelation 11:v.4, like Moses : Exodus 4:v.16 and 7:v.1

Matthew 11:v.27 -... no MAN knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any MAN the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him.

 

[Brianrw]

Answered here
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...ist-and-god-are-in-apposition.2311/#post-8978

Your original “unambiguously states“ remains wrong,

No, not at all. Answered there.

 

[Steven Avery]

Just to get this straight.

,,, Harris ... unambiguously states that "God" in "God blessed forever" is a second predicate (i.e. nominative) to "who is." A predicate nominative renames the subject. He's telling you in the reading "God blessed forever," Christ is being called "God." The first predicate is "over all." Thus "Christ . . . who is over all" and "Christ . . . who is . . . God" are the two predicates he notes. "Blessed" is a predicate adjective, which also describes the subject. You keep thinking by "natural connection" he means Christ is "Blessed by God." That's not how the adjectives work in Greek. It means Christ, who is God, is the one blessed.

Obviously the statement is false, since Murray Harris studies and acknowledges all sorts of interpretations where God is independent. What you were trying to say is that your claim applies to the AV #5 reading, if you work through a pile of complexities. Maybe so.

However what you have above does not work well, because of your double-duty problem.

who is ... God - your claimed second predicate
"Blessed by God" .. now you have God doing the blessing

awkward, ungrammatical, unless you put a comma after God.

 

[Steven Avery]

Moved to

Granville Sharp Rule #1

Granville Sharp Rule #1

Brian likes to go back to Sharp, rather than Wallace. Nothing here about proper names. So the Rule as stated above already is defunct. Does God have a "personal description" ... is God a "person" Does Holy Spirit have a "personal description" .. is the Holy Spirit a "person" .... if a...

purebibleforum.com

 

[Oseas]

Hebrews 1:v.8 - Unto the Son he-GOD the Father- saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

 

[Brianrw]

Obviously the statement is false, since Murray Harris studies and acknowledges all sorts of interpretations where God is independent. What you were trying to say is that your claim applies to the AV #5 reading, if you work through a pile of complexities. Maybe so.

Interpretations that force punctuation on the Greek text as an editorial decision based upon the presupposition that Paul would not call Christ "God." But even in those instances, God is the one being blessed. Why? Because the adjective is still in the predicate position. ("He who is God over all be blessed forever")

This is not a natural rendering of the verse, as Metzger and many others have noted. It is a Socinian emendation.

 

[Oseas]

What matters is the Word of GOD. What does the Word of GOD say? The Word is GOD. https://purebibleforum.com/index.php?threads/the-word-is-god-great-mystery.2494/

Hebrews 7:v.7 NIV - 7 And without doubt the LESSER is BLESSED by the greater.

If we receive the witness of men, the witness of GOD is greater: ...1 John 5:v.9

Hebrews 1:v. 1 to 6 KJV

1 GOD, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son, whom He hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds;

3 Who being the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:

4 Being made so much better than the angels, as He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

6 And again, when He bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, He saith, And let all the angels of GOD worship Him.

Amen