Trinitarians: Your God is not Jesus Christ's God

Our Lord's God said:
Your post here and there only demonstrates that the subject matter is way over your head. Let me make it even easier for you.

Why don"t you translate ὁ ὀφθαλμός σου ὁ δεξιὸς at Matthew 5:29 as "Your eye O Right" just as you want to translate ὁ θρόνος σου, ὁ θεός?

It's the exact same construction.
Click to expand...
Suggest you purchase resources to help you out.
Try to follow.
Greek O definite article = masculine singular

English O = The English vocative particle, used before a pronoun or the name of a person or persons to mark direct address.

The English "O" is not a translation of the Greek "O", but is placed there by the translator as a fill.

Nominative for vocative does not void the definite article. The literal translation with emphasis would be 'Your throne O [the] God..."

Note below are two verses where o theos is nominative for vocative. Should we translate o theos any differently?

Luke 18:11The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other men—extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector.

Mark 15:34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?” which is translated, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”


ὁ θρόνος σου, ὁ θεός?
The eye your the right.

The nominative modifies the subject. In Matthew 5:29 'eye' is the subject, 'right' is the nominative.
Right modifies eye = right eye

ὁ θρόνος σου, ὁ θεός?
Son is the subject, Ho Theos is the nominative.
Ho Theos modifies 'your'.

But we can settle this in vs 9
God also address Jesus as O THEOS which is nominative.
 
Last edited:
Towerwatchman said:
Suggest you purchase resources to help you out.
Try to follow.
Greek O definite article = masculine singular

English O = The English vocative particle, used before a pronoun or the name of a person or persons to mark direct address.

The English "O" is not a translation of the Greek "O", but is placed there by the translator as a fill.
Click to expand...

And you are telling us this WHY? NO ONE has brought up anything to do with it.

Towerwatchman said:
ὁ θρόνος σου, ὁ θεός?
The eye your the right.

The nominative modifies the subject. In Matthew 5:29 'eye' is the subject, 'right' is the nominative.
Right modifies eye = right eye

NEXT
Click to expand...

Now use that exact reasoning with Hebrews 1:8 and what do you get? Or can you even manage it?
 
Our Lord's God said:
And you are telling us this WHY? NO ONE has brought up anything to do with it.
Click to expand...
Your post. "Why don"t you translate ὁ ὀφθαλμός σου ὁ δεξιὸς at Matthew 5:29 as "Your eye O Right" just as you want to translate ὁ θρόνος σου, ὁ θεός?"
Try to follow.


Back to this nonsense.
πρὸς δὲ τὸν υἱόν• ὁ θρόνος σου ὁ θεὸς

The nominative modifies the subject, regardless of the sentence construct, but in this case ὁ θεὸς modifies σου.
 
Towerwatchman said:
The nominative modifies the subject, regardless of the sentence construct, but in this case ὁ θεὸς modifies σου.
Click to expand...


So in the exact same construction elsewhere the nominative does not modify sou but here you insist it does modify sou.

Do you know what hypocrisy is?

BTW, if you had a clue about grammar, the subject of the Psalm quotation is not the son but the throne.
 
Last edited:
Our Lord's God said:
So in the exact same construction elsewhere the nominative does not modify sou but here you insist it does modify sou.
Click to expand...
Grammar 101. The nominative modifies the subject, regardless of the sentence construct.
Tell us if I am wrong.
Is the subject in Matthew 'eye' or 'your"
Is the subject in Hebrews 'Son' or 'throne'.
BTW grammatical rules trump construct.

Our Lord's God said:
Do you know what hypocrisy is?
Click to expand...
What you have posted is simple an ad hominem attack.

It simply attacking the person making the argument rather than the argument itself when the attack on the person is completely irrelevant to the argument the person is making. This is usually the last position of ignorance knowing that it cannot compete with the intelligence and character of X, it is usually a sign of desperation on the part of the one insulting. [Logically Fallacious]
Our Lord's God said:
BTW, if you had a clue about grammar, the subject of the Psalm quotation is not the son but the throne.
Click to expand...
This is another sign of desperation. Keeping verses in isolation. The subject is not determined by a verse designation inserted after Psalms was written. The subject is simply the subject of the Psalm.
Read the following and tell us if 'throne' is the subject of the Psalm.

My heart is overflowing with a good theme;
I recite my composition concerning the King;
My tongue is the pen of a [c]ready writer.
2 You are fairer than the sons of men;
Grace is poured upon Your lips;
Therefore God has blessed You forever.
3 [d]Gird Your sword upon Your thigh, O Mighty One,
With Your glory and Your majesty.
4 And in Your majesty ride prosperously because of truth, humility, and righteousness;
And Your right hand shall teach You awesome things.
5 Your arrows are sharp in the heart of the King’s enemies;
The peoples fall under You.
6 Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
7 You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.

NEXT!!!
 
Towerwatchman said:
HO THEOS is specific.
Click to expand...

1) Does “God” highlighted below refer to HO THEOS?

Towerwatchman said:
7 You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.
Click to expand...

2) Does “God” highlighted below refer to HO THEOS?

Towerwatchman said:
7 You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.
Click to expand...
 
Towerwatchman said:
Grammar 101. The nominative modifies the subject, regardless of the sentence construct.
Tell us if I am wrong.
Is the subject in Matthew 'eye' or 'your'

Is the subject in Hebrews 'Son' or 'throne'.
Click to expand...

The subject of ho thronos sou ho theos is thronos. This is basic grammar.

Sou simply modifies the subject. The writer did not just refer to a throne but modifies this by say it is "your throne" - ho thronos sou.
ho thronos is the subject of the sentence and sou modifies the subject. This should be obvious to you. Why isn't it?

The second nominative theos modifies the first nominative, thronos. That's how it always works with two successive nominatives in Greek. But you want to throw that all out the window for the sake of getting a translation that suits your personal desires.

Basic Greek. That's why the word "right" modifies "eye" at Matthew 5:29. It's exactly the same thing. But you refuse to accept that fact.


Towerwatchman said:
BTW grammatical rules trump construct.


What you have posted is simple an ad hominem attack.

It simply attacking the person making the argument rather than the argument itself when the attack on the person is completely irrelevant to the argument the person is making. This is usually the last position of ignorance knowing that it cannot compete with the intelligence and character of X, it is usually a sign of desperation on the part of the one insulting. [Logically Fallacious]

This is another sign of desperation. Keeping verses in isolation. The subject is not determined by a verse designation inserted after Psalms was written. The subject is simply the subject of the Psalm.
Read the following and tell us if 'throne' is the subject of the Psalm.

My heart is overflowing with a good theme;
I recite my composition concerning the King;
My tongue is the pen of a [c]ready writer.
2 You are fairer than the sons of men;
Grace is poured upon Your lips;
Therefore God has blessed You forever.
3 [d]Gird Your sword upon Your thigh, O Mighty One,
With Your glory and Your majesty.
4 And in Your majesty ride prosperously because of truth, humility, and righteousness;
And Your right hand shall teach You awesome things.
5 Your arrows are sharp in the heart of the King’s enemies;
The peoples fall under You.
6 Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
7 You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.

NEXT!!!
Click to expand...

Now you are babbling to avoid the issue at hand.
 
Last edited:
Yahchristian said:
So you understand the verse to mean...

7 You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
Therefore the God, Your the God has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.

Correct?\
Click to expand...
HO THEOS = YHWH

7 You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
Therefore the God, [YHWH] Your the God [YHWH] has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.
 
Our Lord's God said:
The subject of ho thronos sou ho theos is thronos. This is basic grammar.

Sou simply modifies the subject. The writer did not just refer to a throne but modifies this by say it is "your throne" - ho thronos sou.
ho thronos is the subject of the sentence and sou modifies the subject. This should be obvious to you. Why isn't it?

The second nominative theos modifies the first nominative, thronos. That's how it always works with two successive nominatives in Greek. But you want to throw that all out the window for the sake of getting a translation that suits your personal desires.

Basic Greek. That's why the word "right" modifies "eye" at Matthew 5:29. It's exactly the same thing. But you refuse to accept that fact.




Now you are babbling to avoid the issue at hand.
Click to expand...
Talk about babbling to avoid the issue.
Again the verse designations have no bearing on the original document that contained neither chapter or verse assignment.

is it
ho thronos sou ho theos is thronos.
or is it.
πρὸς δὲ τὸν υἱόν• ὁ θρόνος σου ὁ θεὸς εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ
to but the son the throne of you the God into the age of the

You are playing a dumb game, by isolating part of the verse. Again I will ask the same simple question. Who or what is the subject in Hebrews 1? Is it the throne or the Son?
 
Towerwatchman said:
Talk about babbling to avoid the issue.
Again the verse designations have no bearing on the original document that contained neither chapter or verse assignment.

is it
ho thronos sou ho theos is thronos.
Click to expand...

Nobody said it was.

Towerwatchman said:
or is it.
πρὸς δὲ τὸν υἱόν• ὁ θρόνος σου ὁ θεὸς εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ
to but the son the throne of you the God into the age of the

You are playing a dumb game, by isolating part of the verse. Again I will ask the same simple question. Who or what is the subject in Hebrews 1? Is it the throne or the Son?
Click to expand...

Wow, are you ever confused.
 
cjab said:
No, there is no "the" is Jn 1:1c. You've completely missed the point.
Click to expand...
The gospel of John is intended to be read based on the thesis which is the first 18 verses, which is anchored on the first verse. If one believes that in the first verse, Jesus is God [YHWH], then one reads the gospel from that point of view, but if one believes Jesus is a created being or something else based on the first verse, then one will read the rest of the gospel based on that point of view. Therefore, the deity of Jesus in John 1:1 should be determined by John 1:1

Dissect vs 1 into a logical argument [premise 1] In the beginning was the Word, [premise 2] and the Word was with God, [conclusion] and the Word was God [or a god or X.] Therefore, premise 1 and or 2 should support either “God” or “a god”.

Hint = its premise 1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top