Romans 9:5 - the circular claim that Christ and God are in apposition

Steven Avery

Administrator
This has been explained before.

Saying they are in apposition is the same as saying that Christ is God, so the argument is inherently circular. There is no grammatical imperative that they are in apposition.

Brian writes, again and again, circularly:

Because the construction is "who is over all, God," where "God" is an appositive to Christ.

And I point out:

You erred in claiming apposition between God and Christ as some sort of grammatical trigger when it was only your circular conclusion.

Brian gives some wild interpretations claiming apposition where you try to separate God from blessed, eg.

In the construction "Who is over all, God" "God" is used as an apposition because it follows a comma.

Murray Harris gave it a simple, and powerful refutation here:

"natural association of θεὸς with εὐλογητὸς"​

You try to make this into something other than the obvious meaning - God blessed as a unit. (In your Murray Harris thread post.)
Your attempt is a failure.

The natural association is in Murray Harris's #5, the AV text, with the comma in the right spot.
The fact that Harris essentially puts that as #2 in his final decision is just a Murray Harris weakness. Many people are under spir-emotional peer pressure to find verses that say "Jesus is God".

The review of Sherlock also explained this surprisingly well.

Also it means you accuse the AV text as being wrong.

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.

It would be easy enough to place God in apposition by adding (he is) either by Paul in the Greek or by italics in the AV text.
That was deliberately NOT done, because the apposition is a false theory.

You try to get around that with comma sophistry, and that fails as well, as I discussed in the elocutionary and syntactical post.

Here is the text you propose, your correction of the AV another way of reaching your missing "he is"

Romans 9:5 (Winter Version)
Whose are the fathers,
and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came,
who is over all,
(he is) God,
blessed for ever.
Amen.

That is the Winter Proposed AV-Correction Version.

You confuse yourself above by claiming that the comma before God means they are in apposition. It could, as in the Winter text above, but it also could not, as in any translation that directly links God and blessed as one unit. Logic 101.

(On that, you went into hyphen sophistry, easily refuted.)
 
Last edited:

"natural association of θεὸς with εὐλογητὸς"​

You try to make this into something other than the obvious meaning - God blessed as a unit. (In your Murray Harris thread post.
This is not what Harris means, you can stomp and shout attempt to tar me all you want. Adjectives in Greek do not become verbs in English. You think Harris agrees with you, but he doesn't. Harris is not saying it could mean either Christ is "God" or Christ is "blessed by God.""Blessed by God" requires the verbal construction ευλογημένος από τον Θεόν. I've told you the truth very often, you choose not to believe it.

What Harris is saying​

Go see the first sentence of his discussion point 5 on p. 160, especially the 2nd paragraph on p. 163. 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.

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), which 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, 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."
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
This is not what Harris means, you can stomp and shout attempt to tar me all you want. Adjectives in Greek do not become verbs in English.

The English AV text does not have a verb. I have told you this again and again.

God blessed is an adjectival phrase, or unit, to Christ. For ever is adverbial.

You will never understand “natural association” until you get this right.
 
The English AV text does not have a verb. I have told you this again and again.

God blessed is an adjectival phrase, or unit, to Christ. For ever is adverbial.

You will never understand “natural association” until you get this right.
"God-blessed" is an adjectival phrase. You're now appropriating Harris' words, "natural association" and forcing your own meaning on them. I'll refer you again to my above comments, reviewing what Harris is actually saying (with more emphasis now added):

Go see the first sentence of his discussion point 5 on p. 160, especially the 2nd paragraph on p. 163. 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.

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), which 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, 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."

I also noticed this little gem:
God blessed is an adjectival phrase, or unit, to Christ. For ever is adverbial.
So "God blessed" is an adjective, but is described with an adverb? "Forever" here, both in Greek and English, is a noun! You can't stop changing the function of the words in the English sentence, can you?
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
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."

Again?
We covered this earlier.

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

You missed the fact that on p. 165 he refers to

at least two distinct affirmations concerning Christ, he is "over all", or "blessed for ever"

So he is NOT insisting on three, which would only apply in cases where God is equated in identity with Christ. In our discussion that is circular reasoning.

You should read more carefully and less selectively.
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
I also noticed this little gem:

So "God blessed" is an adjective, but is described with an adverb? "Forever" here, both in Greek and English, is a noun! You can't stop changing the function of the words in the English sentence, can you?

Covered here:

Maybe I will have to put up a special thread on the adjectival-adverbial nature of "God blessed for ever".

It is also on the grammar summary page.
 

Steven Avery

Administrator

What Harris is saying​

Go see the first sentence of his discussion point 5 on p. 160, especially the 2nd paragraph on p. 163. 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.

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), which 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, he notes that "appositional (or predicative)," θεὸς in the passage "functions as a qualitative noun, highlighting Christ's inherent Divinity."

Now that we have corrected some errors on adjectives and adverbs, and the two or three affirmations, we have all this from Harris. The bottom line is that, while Harris gives a fine text with his #5, he misses the simple translation and understanding that I am showing you on the Trichotomy page. His footnote 83 goes to left field with Lenski.

Your first paragraph above seems to agree closely with my understanding. Christ is the subject, God blessed is the adjective, for ever is the adverb.

Your second paragraph includes some error, but it is based on particular interpretations.

Similarly, the "functions as a qualitative noun, highlighting Christ's inherent Divinity" is standard quasi-orthodox extrapolation.

1637455369533.png


There is a bunch of irony there. Murray Harris is denying identifying Christ with God the Father, yet your whole push is for exactly that identification. Plus basing all this on being anarthrous has no real basis.

Sometimes you get throwaway line.
 
I added back in what you keep ignoring/omitting, and kept together the two paragraphs you keep separating.
murray_harris_rom9-5.jpg

This is not rocket science. It is, in fact, simple to follow when your presuppositions do not get in the way. Both appositions and predicate nominatives rename the subject, only the manner it happens in the sentence is different. A predicate nominative is attached to a linking verb (i.e., "who is").
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
Thank you for the pic.
What I wrote above stands.

Why don’t you give your differing Greek text when God does not “rename the subject”.

=======

Murray
”not ... identifying Christ with God the Father”

Do you agree?

=======
 
Thank you for the pic.
What I wrote above stands.
That's called Proof by Assertion. Since you refuse to listen, I'll add Metzger (pp. 57, 59) as a second witness:

metzger_Rom9-5.jpg


Why don’t you give your differing Greek text when God does not “rename the subject”.
There is no "differing Greek," and the Greek authors as far back as we have record had no problem understanding it the same way I do. Your interpretation isn't found at all among them. That alone should give you pause.

For your convenience, regarding the function of a predicate nominative Cf. here (thesaurus.com):

The predicate nominative (or predicate noun) is the noun or pronoun that comes after a linking verb. It renames the subject of the sentence.

And what a predicate adjective is and does:

Predicate adjectives also tend to appear after a linking verb and provide more information about the subject of a sentence.​
The "linking verb," is, is in the construction ὁ ὢν ("who is"). Predicate (1) Christ . . . ὢν ("who is") over all; Predicate (2) Christ . . .ὢν ("who is") . . . God. Predicate adjective: Christ . . . ὢν ("who is") . . . blessed forever. Thus Harris refers to "God" as a second predicate (the first being over all)

I assume you will try to catch words, in your usual manner, over what constitutes "renaming." Daily Grammar has a pretty concise and simple explanation of predicate nominatives with examples:

A predicate nominative or predicate noun completes a linking verb and renames the subject. It is a complement or completer because it completes the verb. The verb in a sentence having a predicate nominative can always be replaced by the word equals.​

Examples:​
Mr. Johanson is a teacher.​
Mr. Johanson equals a teacher.​
Mr. Johanson is a father.​
Mr. Johanson equals a father.​
Mr. Johanson is my neighbor.​
Mr. Johanson equals my neighbor.​
Murray
”not ... identifying Christ with God the Father”

Do you agree?
Christ is not the Father, as was the mistake of Noetus reading this passage. Harris mentions this as a potential pitfall of the reading "God over all," in the paragraph preceding where the bottom half of the snippet starts.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
There is no "differing Greek,"

Thank you!

You have just conceded that our TR text would be totally proper if God is an independent noun of God blessed, the one doing the blessing.

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

I'll give you one more chance. Let us say you are a Greek writer and you want to indicate God blessed in that manner, where there is no apposition to Christ, you can give your modified Greek text that would achieve that purpose.

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

If you do not have a modified text, you have conceded the point. If you do have one, we will have something substantial to work with.
 
Thank you!

You have just conceded that our TR text would be totally proper if God is an independent noun of God blessed, the one doing the blessing.
No, I didn't at all. There is no construction found in that passage where you can form a compound like you might be able to in the English. You can't read Greek like the English--it's not how it operates, and quite honestly it makes you look incredibly silly doing so.

I said "Christ is not the Father." I didn't say He wasn't one with the Father or that He wasn't God.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
The main part has now been brought over to the specialty thread:

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

Again, can you give an alternate Greek text that matches the sense of a single-duty God, part of the natural association "God blessed", not in apposition to Christ, a Greek proposed text that is different than the TR text used in the AV.

Or, are you really claiming that the idea is impossible to express in Greek?

Or do you agree that the TR text is the way, or a good way, to express that idea?

You must choose one of the three, there are no logical alternatives.

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

(I am bypassing your compound claim, you used to connect that with your false claims about hyphens in English.)

Please answer directly, to point.

Thanks!

Plus, you did not answer my "God" question, but lets focus on your Greek->English claim.
 
Last edited:
(I am bypassing your compound claim, you used to connect that with your false claims about hyphens in English.)
I said I would be gracious, but since you are acting in bad faith, to the extent of becoming insulting and misstating my points, I will respond as I might have earlier:
  1. The Greek εὐλογητὸς is an adjective, not a verb. However to you, "God blessed" expresses the (verbal) idea of "Christ . . . who is . . . blessed by God." In this, you awkwardly treat "God blessed" as a participle construction (hence, noun + verb), and state that the noun is implied even though it is an equative clause and the noun is stated.

  2. Participles (verbs ending -ed and -ing) are adjectival, and that is where you are mistaken—equivocating over "blessed" (adjective, bles-sed) and the past participle "blessed" (verb, blest).

  3. In the participle sense, "Compound nouns comprised of a noun and a participle (in any order) must be hyphenated when being used as an adjective...Otherwise, no hyphens are needed." They also need to go before the noun, not after, to function as an adjective. After the noun they serve as a normal noun + participle construction. Thus they are not hyphenated and you are once again left with a verb, not an adjective.

  4. The last recourse to force a compound is to make it a compound verb: "Compound verbs comprised of an adjective and a noun, or a noun and a verb, are usually hyphenated: to cold-shoulder, to gift-wrap, to baby-sit" (yes, also after the noun). But this creates a compound verb, not an adjective.

  5. You have yet to explain how a Greek adjective can come into English as a participle, and have in fact ignored requests to explain this repeatedly.

  6. Most recently, you say my translation needs a comma after "God." But not when the adjective is used in a postpositive construction (e.g. God Almighty), as it is in the AV, "God blessed" (Cf. the English translation of Hippolytus, "He who is over all, God blessed [postpositive], has been born; and having been made man, He is (yet) God forever." etc.)

Again, can you give an alternate Greek text that matches the sense of a single-duty God, part of the natural association "God blessed", not in apposition to Christ, a Greek proposed text that is different than the TR text used in the AV.

Or, are you really claiming that the idea is impossible to express in Greek?
I said it's impossible to translate θεὸς εὐλογητὸς in the sense of "blessed by God" in Romans 9:5. I have honestly explained why multiple times, and if you refused to listen then you will refuse to listen again now and further wast my time "doting about questions and strifes of words." The Greek construction you need to convey the meaning "blessed by God" is ευλογημένος από τον Θεόν ('blessed by God") or the like.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
I said it's impossible to translate θεὸς εὐλογητὸς in the sense of "blessed by God" in Romans 9:5. I have honestly explained why multiple times, and if you refused to listen then you will refuse to listen again now and further wast my time "doting about questions and strifes of words." The Greek construction you need to convey the meaning "blessed by God" is ευλογημένος από τον Θεόν ('blessed by God") or the like.

Then why did Murray Harris not indicate this when he compared the two constructions?

And why did the AV punctuate as if it is "God blessed" == "blessed by God" ?

Your original answer was that it needed a hyphen in English for that meaning, and that claim was shown to be false.

(Now I want to see if you answered the other thread as to who is actually doing the blessing.)
 
Then why did Murray Harris not indicate this when he compared the two constructions?
Because the construction is so simple, a first semester Greek student would understand it.

Your original answer was that it needed a hyphen in English for that meaning, and that claim was shown to be false.
No, I said that you are using "God blessed" as a compound verb. As noted above, you never actually dealt with the rule I was referring to (which is really no refutation at all). Namely: "Compound verbs comprised of an adjective and a noun, or a noun and a verb, are usually hyphenated: to cold-shoulder, to gift-wrap, to baby-sit"

If you want that construction to serve as an adjective alone, you have the equal problem that "Compound nouns comprised of a noun and a participle (in any order) must be hyphenated when being used as an adjective...Otherwise, no hyphens are needed." This must occur before a noun, and thus without being hyphenated they don't work as an adjective, leaving here an ordinary noun and a participle verb (a participle acts like a verb and an adjective). The noun + verb construct should be hyphenated as noted in the first paragraph above. That's the long of it.

And this is all a diversion to the fact of the matter that the Greek is a noun and an adjective, and the construction doesn't support any such remedy in English for your interpretation.

And why did the AV punctuate as if it is "God blessed" == "blessed by God" ?
It's called a postpositive adjective, which does not require a comma after God. The whole unit in English functions together. Another example of a postpositive is "God Almighty" (i.e. The Almighty God: He is God and He is Almighty). The same here is true, He is "God blessed" forever, meaning He (i.e., The Blessed God: He is God and He is blessed forever). You can see this usage in Hippolytus, and in some of the English commentators I've noted. The Greek involves a predicate construction. If you want to understand the basic adjective usage, I can explain it from there.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
No, I said that you are using "God blessed" as a compound verb.

Total nonsense.
Making the rest superfluous.

Even in Greek
"Both θεὸς and εὐλογητὸς are in the nominative case and are both nouns [εὐλογητὸς is actually an adjective, "
http://biblicalgreeknuggets.blogspot.com/2010/08/romans-95-what-does-it-say.html

θεὸς ὐλογητὸς == God blessed
There is no verb in Greek, there is no verb in English. (I have told you this many times.)

The verb is implied, there are two options.

(Christ is ) .. God blessed (adjectival unit) for ever - the Authorized Version
God (is) blessed for ever. -

You reject those.

Or your choice, adding punctuation, just like the Socinians, and breaking the natural association.

(Christ is) God, blessed for ever (by his people, or creation, or something).

And you lack the simple honesty to acknowledge that you change the AV text.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Because the construction is so simple, a first semester Greek student would understand it.

Very dubious. We are talking about his conversation on p. 161-162.
Really he talks about the normal Biblical order.
If your claim of a totally different meaning were true, it would in fact be on these two pages, your vapid dismissal above notwithstanding.

Apologies for the fuzziness.
p. 161

1637773829591.png


p. 162

1637774112916.png
 
Top