I'm sure Mssrs. Conrad and Robertson are fine scholars when it comes to the Greek language but when it comes to speculative theological exegesis they wandered off into personal opinions.
Quite simply two different verbs were used because two different things, birth, coming into existence and existence as such were being spoken about.
Ps. 90:2 use three phrases. The third is: “even from time indefinite to time indefinite you are God.”
It's a good English and preserves the sense of the verse so how else would it be translated?
If referring to ones self as ego eimi was equating them self with God then the blind man of John 9:9 was doing so.
“In any event, 1 Cor. 8:6 does nothing at all to eliminate the obvious, that Thomas addressed those words directly to Jesus, and they were received by Jesus as a declaration of belief in Him, with no differentiation made between Lord and God.”
Then some how Paul's words at 1 Cor. must contradict the trinitarian definition of God as the Father is the “one God” and Jesus is called the “One Lord” even though both terms can be applied to others.
So what Thomas exclaimed is contradictory of Paul? That Lord and God were in fact the “one God”? Or was Thomas calling God the Father and God the Son one and the same?
Remember Jesus called his Father, ‘My God and your God’.
“What about the “ye are gods” business from Psalm 82:6? Read it again. It’s not a denial, it’s a justification.”
If a justification it was a justification for calling himself not God but Son of God.
You're going to tell us “what this moral obligation of Jesus” is! Outstanding!
“In any event, 1 Cor. 8:6 does nothing at all to eliminate the obvious, that Thomas addressed those words directly to Jesus, and they were received by Jesus as a declaration of belief in Him, with no differentiation made between Lord and God. Which, as we have discussed before, is wrong for Jesus to let pass,By passing up that opportunity to redirect Thomas to worship if indeed he is mere creature, and not in fact God. only God the Father, he has confused countless generations into thinking it is OK to address Jesus as my Lord and my God.”
“.... Which, as we have discussed before, is wrong for Jesus to let pass,By passing up that opportunity to redirect Thomas to worship if indeed he is mere creature, and not in fact God....”
What Jesus’ moral obligations are and what is wrong for Jesus to respond to or not I would not have the ‘chutzpah’ to venture but I would remind you that angels spoke in the first person as though they were Jehovah and accepted being addressed as such and that was acceptable and accepted.
So I've never denied being a lot of things over the years because the accusers wouldn't be swayed and those who knew me didn't need to be. But it didn't make any of it true.
“I stand by my analysis. Show me the verse where he said, unequivocally, “Hey guys, you got it wrong, I’m not actually God or even claiming to be God.” Maybe you have that verse in the NWT, and it wouldn’t surprise me if it was in there. But my Bible has no such thing.”
To which I reply:
I stand by my analysis. Show me the verse where he said, unequivocally, “Hey guys, you got it right, I am actually God and I am claiming to be God.”
“Maybe you have that verse in the NWT, and it wouldn’t surprise me if it was in there. But my Bible has no such thing.”
If you don't know anything about the NWT perhaps you ought not comment on it. Just a thought.
I am very sorry, but it appears we have reached, at least for now, a point of no return. I feel we have no shared understanding of how the Greek works, and without at least that as a common ground, we are doomed to go in circles forever getting nowhere. Honestly, I am too old for that. I need my sleep. No hard feelings.
Peace,
SR