Jehovah's Witnesses If Jesus really wasn't the Lord and THE God of Thomas, why didn't Jesus correct him?

Question

In Jn 20:28, Thomas refers to Jesus in Greek as "Ho kyrios moy kai ho theos moy". This translates literally as "the Lord of me and THE God of me". Why does Jesus, in Jn 20:29, affirm Thomas for having come to this realization? If Jesus really wasn't the Lord and THE God of Thomas, why didn't Jesus correct him for making either a false assumption or a blasphemous statement?

Answer 1

John 20:28 (RS) reads: “Thomas answered him, ‘My Lord and my God!’”



There is no objection to referring to Jesus as “God,” if this is what Thomas had in mind. Such would be in harmony with Jesus’ own quotation from the Psalms in which powerful men, judges, were addressed as “gods.” (John 10:34, 35, RS; Ps. 82:1-6) Of course, Christ occupies a position far higher than such men. Because of the uniqueness of his position in relation to Jehovah, at John 1:18 (NW) Jesus is referred to as “the only-begotten god.” (See also Ro, By.) Isaiah 9:6 (RS) also prophetically describes Jesus as “Mighty God,” but not as the Almighty God. All of this is in harmony with Jesus’ being described as “a god,” or “divine,” at John 1:1 (NW, AT).



The context helps us to draw the right conclusion from this. Shortly before Jesus’ death, Thomas had heard Jesus’ prayer in which he addressed his Father as “the only true God.” (John 17:3, RS) After Jesus’ resurrection Jesus had sent a message to his apostles, including Thomas, in which he had said: “I am ascending . . . to my God and your God.” (John 20:17, RS) After recording what Thomas said when he actually saw and touched the resurrected Christ, the apostle John stated: “These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.” (John 20:31, RS) So, if anyone has concluded from Thomas’ exclamation that Jesus is himself “the only true God” or that Jesus is a Trinitarian “God the Son,” he needs to look again at what Jesus himself said (vs. 17) and at the conclusion that is clearly stated by the apostle John (vs. 31).

LOBT

Answer 2

Thomas was neither blasphemous nor incorrect.



Thomas had earlier expressed his need for physical proof before he would believe that the resurrected Jesus had appeared to other disciples.

.. ..(John 20:24-25) Thomas, one of the twelve, who was called The Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. Consequently the other disciples would say to him: “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them: “Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails and stick my finger into the print of the nails and stick my hand into his side, I will certainly not believe.”





While Thomas was unspecific about what he would withhold belief regarding, astute Bible students note there would have been two separate things. That:

1. They had really seen Jesus rather than someone else.

2. Jesus had been resurrected to divine glory.



It is interesting to consider whether Thomas might have abandoned this demand if he had not been blessed with the experience related at John 20:26-29. As Peter noted, even in Bible times most Christians never experienced the physical evidence of Jesus' resurrection. However, Thomas was blessed with that which answered both of his questions.

.. ..(John 20:26-29) Well, eight days later his disciples were again indoors, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, although the doors were locked, and he stood in their midst and said: “May you have peace.” Next he said to Thomas: “Put your finger here, and see my hands, and take your hand and stick it into my side, and stop being unbelieving but become believing.” In answer Thomas said to him: “My Lord and my God!” Jesus said to him: “Because you have seen me have you believed? Happy are those who do not see and yet believe.”



When Thomas recognized that it was really Jesus rather than someone else, he exclaimed "My Lord".



When Thomas recognized that Jesus had been resurrected to divine glory (rather than merely as a human), he exclaimed "My God".



Scriptures such as Isaiah 9:6, John 1:1, and John 1:18 convince Christians that Jesus is (in fact) a god, so it would have been entirely appropriate for Thomas to have exclaimed as he did, especially considering the emotion and enthusiasm then and there.



Nearly every Christian then and now acknowledges Jesus' resurrection and divinity. Sadly, too few Christians understand that the Bible teaches that Jesus is a distinct person from Jehovah.

Answer 3

No doubt the reason Jesus did not correct Thomas is because Jesus did not understand Thomas to mean what you suppose he meant. A few verses down, it says:



"But these have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, you may have life by means of his name."



Obviously, when the apostle John wrote down the account years later, he was not in confusion either. The apostles recognized Jesus as the Son of God. They were under no Trinitarian delusion back then. However, many modern readers see the expression "Son of God," and their minds, after years of being conditioned by Trinitarian theology, reflexively transpose that expression into "God the Son."



Thomas was moved to make a declaration to reaffirm that he recognized Jesus as his Lord and representative of Jehovah God.

Answer 4

He did correct him. Jesus basically asks Thomas a rebuking, rhetorical question regarding his faith based on sight, while others have faith although they have not seen. Jesus corrected Thomas for relying on physical evidence of his resurrection, and evidently didn't see the need for correction of other matters at that particular time. I trust that Jesus helped Thomas to make the proper needed adjustments to his thinking without recording all of it in the Bible. Recognizing the extent of Jesus' authority was not the issue at that particular time in the Bible. Having faith in Jesus' resurrection was. Point made- move on. There's a whole bunch more Bible to read!

Answer 5

Jesus is a god in the sense of being divine, but he is not the Father. Jesus had just told Mary Magdalene: “I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.” Remember, too, why John wrote his Gospel. Three verses after the account about Thomas, John explained that he wrote so that people “may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God”—not that he is God.—John 20:17, 28, 31.

Answer 6

I asked a similar question a while ago, and all I got was babblings from JWs who simply would not say Thomas' words "Jesus is my Lord and my God!". They like to use the lines "who is Thomas?", "which Thomas?", "Jesus is Lord and God as representative to JWs", "Jesus is Thomas' Lord and God", and on and on.....



Fact remains, the JWs never shared a similar belief with Thomas, and never would they exclaim the same words as Thomas with no strings attached, no words added or taken away, and they definitely would not live up to such words and bow and worship, pray to their Lord and their God, if He is worthy at all as such. Jesus is NEVER their Lord and their God!

Answer 7

There is nothing in the context of this verse that proves the expression "the God of me" was referring to Jesus.



There are many examples in the bible where people are referring to Jesus as Lord, and his Father as God.



1 Cor 8:6yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ,



Thus Jesus would have also understood that Thomas was referring to both Jesus and their God, Jehovah. (see vs 17)



The context of what John wrote is important for we then can understand what he was trying to teach by including this account in the bible.



John 20:17Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.



Here Jesus uses the same expression "God of me" as Thomas. (also see Rev 3:2 & 12 "The God of me")



John 20:31But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.



Please note the whole reason John wrote his gospel was to prove what?



That Jesus is the Son of God.



Finally what did John truly believe?



Rev 1:6and He has made us to be a kingdom, priests to His God and Father--



Please note John did not believe that Jesus was God Almighty.



Thus the context of John 20, is in harmony with all the scriptures that show Jesus is the Son, and not God himself.



Why is it that when Thomas uses an expression "IT CAN ONLY MEAN ONE THING"



yet,



When Jesus uses this same expression 7 times it means something else?



.

Answer 8

Jesus knew what Thomas meant. So did John. A few verses after Thomas' exclamation, John wrote: "But these are written so that you may continue to believe[d] that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life by the power of his name. John 20:31.



Someone above said: "Jesus did not correct Him because He is God. Jesus had been already crucified for the blasphemy." That shows lack of understanding of the Scriptures. Was Jesus killed because he claimed to be God? No. At John 19:7, Jesus' enemies said to Pilate: "“By our law he ought to die because he called himself the Son of God.” During Jesus' execution, his enemies said of him: "He trusted God, so let God rescue him now if he wants him! For he said, ‘I am the Son of God.’” (Matt. 27:43) So, was Jesus executed for claiming to be God? No. He was put to death for claiming to be God's Son.



"You need to research what the trinity is instead of letting the Governing Body tell you what the trinity means."



To the contrary, you need to do research on the trinity. According to the trinity, Jesus makes up only one of three parts of the triune God. By himself, he is only a person of God, not the entire so-called godhead. So, to call Jesus God would be to call him a three-person deity. But how can one person be three persons at the same time? Not possible.

Answer 9

What LOBT said.



For every scattered scripture used to "support" the trinity, or believed to support it, there are dozens that prove it to be unscriptural.



I would really encourage anyone to read one chapter in the Bible ... just one entire chapter .... John 17 ... and come away with an honest assessment of how many people we are reading about. Who was Jesus praying to, who sent him, verse 11 directly refutes the idea that Jesus meant that he and his father were literally the same being when he said "I and the father are one in John 10:30. So many things just in that one chapter.

Answer 10

Yes and I agree John knew exactly who Jesus was. That is the reason for John coming out and saying up front John 1:1 and the Word was God. Jesus confesses in many places that he is God Himself. Jesus used the word Father because he was in flesh (man) talking to flesh (man). (Can you imagine how people would have re-acted if Jesus went around saying "I am your Almighty God?"). Jesus had to tell people that he was the *son of God* because he had to talk to them in a way that they will understand. Even the Sanhedrin's knew what Jesus was referring to but they could not accept it because Jesus did not come to earth as *royalty* like what they thought Jesus would be. The Sanhedrin's was bigots to look down upon the poor and oppress. Another confession Jesus made "The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life---only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down by my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father." John 10: 17, 18.

When the flesh of Jesus died; God's spirit left the flesh and rose back to heaven. Now wether any one don't want to admit to this or not; surely all know Jesus is God *I Am*. That's the *main* reason why, *only then* could the disciples receive the Holy Spirit. Ask yourself "How could they receive the Holy Spirit if God was still on earth?" The answer; "God had to be back in heaven in His Supreme Being again to give out His Holy Spirit." Think about this.

Answer 11

Jesus did not correct Him because He is God.



Jesus had been already crucified for the blasphemy, no worries anymore keeping the low profile ; )

Answer 12

You address your question to Jehovah's Witnesses. Surely you are aware that many professed Christians flatly reject the doctrine of the Trinity. Not a few of them post right here on Yahoo.



Why did Jesus not "correct him for making either a false assumption or a blasphemous statement?" Jesus did not always correct the false assumptions of his apostles. Examples embedded in scripture. And I do not see any basis for suggesting that Thomas was being blasphemous.



I think you mentioned something about researching the meaning of the Trinity doctrine and not getting it from the Governing Body. I agree wholeheartedly. The doctrine comes to us from the Roman Catholic church (which as you know predates the Protestant church by centuries). The trinity is based on the Catholic Athanasian Creed. Submitted herewith for your perusal is the definition in its entirety:



"Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity. Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is all One, the Glory Equal, the Majesty Co-Eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father Uncreate, the Son Uncreate, and the Holy Ghost Uncreate. The Father Incomprehensible, the Son Incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost Incomprehensible. THE FATHER ETERNAL, THE SON ETERNAL, AND THE HOLY GHOST ETERNAL and yet they are not Three Eternals but One Eternal. As also there are not Three Uncreated, nor Three Incomprehensibles, but One Uncreated, and One Uncomprehensible. So likewise THE FATHER IS ALMIGHTY, THE SON ALMIGHTY, AND THE HOLY GHOST ALMIGHTY. And yet they are not Three Almighties but One Almighty.



So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not Three Gods, but One God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not Three Lords but One Lord. For, like as WE ARE COMPELLED BY THE CHRISTIAN VERITY TO ACKNOWLEDGE EVERY PERSON BY HIMSELF TO BE GOD and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion to say, there be Three Gods or Three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father, and of the Son neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.



So there is One Father, not Three Fathers; one Son, not Three Sons; One Holy Ghost, not Three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity NONE IS AFORE OR AFTER OTHER, NONE IS GREATER OR LESS THAN ANOTHER, BUT THE WHOLE THREE PERSONS ARE CO-ETERNAL TOGETHER, AND CO-EQUAL. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity is Trinity, and the Trinity is Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity.



Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting Salvation, that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man.



God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the substance of His mother, born into the world. Perfect God and Perfect Man, of a reasonable Soul and human Flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His Manhood. Who, although He be God and Man, yet He is not two, but One Christ. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into Flesh, but by taking of the Manhood into God. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by Unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one Man, so God and Man is one Christ. Who suffered for our salvation, descended into Hell, rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into Heaven, He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil into everlasting fire. This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved." (Caps mine) End of definition.



This doctrine violates the Scriptures in their entirety; particularly the sections in all caps. What do other professed Christians say about the Trinity?



The current mainstream teaching in Christianity is that God is a coequal, coeternal, one-substance trinity, and that Jesus Christ is God. This doctrine is considered by many as the cornerstone of Christianity, but where did this doctrine come from? The historical record is overwhelming that the church of the first three centuries did not worship God as a coequal, coeternal, consubstantial, one-substance three in one mysterious godhead. The early church worshipped one God and believed in a subordinate Son. The trinity originated with Babylon, and was passed on to most of the world's religions."



www.christadelphia.org



"In all Scripture, there is nothing to justify this absurd and self-contradictory mizmaze. While truly we can never hope with mortal minds to comprehend God, still the revelations He gives of Himself, and of His Son, and of His Holy Spirit - His power and presence which fills all immensity and works His will - is clear and simple and reasonable and a tremendously satisfying relief from the befuddled speculations as quoted above. The doctrine of the "Trinity" is nowhere found in the Bible. "



G.V. "Rene" Growcott (www.antipas.org)



. . . the history of the trinity doctrine is open knowledge. The true church never accepted the idea, and even the false church did not embrace it until three centuries after Christ! Even then, it was only accepted as a political concession to the Roman emperor, Constantine. Add these facts to its absence in the Scripture, and it is no wonder the Catholics and Protestants call it a mystery!"



"Fact is, it's rather easy to expose the deception of the trinity."



"The trick used by trinitarians to try and prove three Gods are three persons, is their use of segmentalism. They will take segments of Scripture, segments of a text, segments of an incident, out of the context of the whole Bible, and try to make them say what the entire Bible refutes."



Pastor G. Reckhart



"The Early Church of the Bible knew nothing of a Trinity Doctrine. The very term "Trinity" or the teaching of it as a Christian doctrine did not start until 180 A.D. This is almost 150 years after the Church, under the new covenant, started in A.D. 33 on the day of Pentecost. One can search the Acts of the Apostles in the Bible which is the true History of the early Church thoroughly and not find any of the Apostles teaching the Trinity.



Thunder Ministries. Com



Yet how many verses clearly contradict the trinitarian view? There are hundreds. This is not a matter of a few verses clarifying or modifying a scriptural precept. Rather, it is a matter of hundreds of verses contradicting less than half a dozen. The burning question that needs to be answered is why do people cling to the half dozen or so, and reject the hundreds?"



www.jesusfamilies.org



"One reason I reject the doctrine of the Trinity is that there is a huge constellation of false doctrine orbiting it. It was after this debate that I decided to make an actual list of the different false doctrines that have been given birth because of the Trinity doctrine."



Kenneth James Solheim Th.B.

"It is amazing to me that many Trinitarians believe that their cherished belief was one believed upon by all Christians since Jesus day. The truth, however, is that the trinity was not believed upon by all Christians even as late as the Counsel of Nicene at 325 A.D."



Kenneth James Solheim Th.B.



"The doctrine of the "Holy Trinity" considered by many to be essential to one's very salvation, is not found in Christianity until at least three hundred years after the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Even more shocking is the fact that the concept of a triune godhead likely comes from the traditions of paganism!"



www.angelfire.com





Hannah J Paul