Steven Avery
Administrator
First Brian says, yes, since he agrees with Murray Harris
Brian has the same quote here, where he says that Harris is appositional, which is clearly his position as well. Likely he has said this about a dozen times.
Romans 9:5 - the circular claim that Christ and God are in apposition
https://purebibleforum.com/index.ph...ist-and-god-are-in-apposition.2311/#post-8978
Checking Murray Harris:
Three distinct affirmations requires three clauses.
he is Lord of all,
he is God by nature,
and he will be eternally praised.
Romans 9:5 (AV - comma missing, NOT three distinct affirmations)
Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came,
who is over all,
God
blessed for ever.
Amen.
Then Brian says no, when the same position is taken by Gess.
First Gess
Frédéric Louis Godet (1812-1890)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frédéric_Louis_Godet
Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans (1883)
Frédéric Louis Godet
https://books.google.com/books?id=E91JAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA345
Wolfgang Friedrich Gess (1819-1891)
Bibelstunden über den Brief des Apostels Paulus an die Römer ...: Cap. 9-16 (1889)
Wolfgang Friedrich Gess
https://books.google.com/books?id=YQMsAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA39
Christi Person Und Werk is 1870 (used by Abbot)
https://books.google.com/books/about/Christi_Person_und_Werk.html?id=ZegwyQEACAAJ
So, why does Brian attack his own three distinct affirmations position?
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."
Brian has the same quote here, where he says that Harris is appositional, which is clearly his position as well. Likely he has said this about a dozen times.
Romans 9:5 - the circular claim that Christ and God are in apposition
https://purebibleforum.com/index.ph...ist-and-god-are-in-apposition.2311/#post-8978
Checking Murray Harris:
Jesus as God: The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus
Murray J. Harris
https://books.google.com/books?id=TkD7DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA167
Ironically, Harris seems to sense his problem.
Three distinct affirmations requires three clauses.
he is Lord of all,
he is God by nature,
and he will be eternally praised.
Romans 9:5 (AV - comma missing, NOT three distinct affirmations)
Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came,
who is over all,
God
blessed for ever.
Amen.
Then Brian says no, when the same position is taken by Gess.
First Gess
Gess doesn't have my position, since he forms an appositional phrase that forms three clauses out of two and makes "blessed" appositional of Christ, which is why Godet decries the separation of "God" from "blessed." You should actually read the whole commentary. This is precisely why there should be no comma after "God."
Frédéric Louis Godet (1812-1890)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frédéric_Louis_Godet
Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans (1883)
Frédéric Louis Godet
https://books.google.com/books?id=E91JAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA345
Wolfgang Friedrich Gess (1819-1891)
Wolfgang Friedrich Gess - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Bibelstunden über den Brief des Apostels Paulus an die Römer ...: Cap. 9-16 (1889)
Wolfgang Friedrich Gess
https://books.google.com/books?id=YQMsAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA39
Christi Person Und Werk is 1870 (used by Abbot)
https://books.google.com/books/about/Christi_Person_und_Werk.html?id=ZegwyQEACAAJ
So, why does Brian attack his own three distinct affirmations position?
Last edited: