What does it mean, "God blessed for ever"?

Brianrw

Member
Since there has been confusion spilling over into many threads of this topic, I'm posting this to clarify the meaning of "God blessed for ever" in Romans 9:5. It is a simple fact that a translation should match the meaning of the text it is translated from, and that rules in one language should not be applied to another.

In the English text, Paul refers to the Israelites, to whom pertains the adoption, the giving of the law, etc. and from whom is Christ. After this, there are two clauses in the AV that give additional information about Christ and contrast with "according to the flesh": (1) that He is "over all" and (2) that He is "God blessed for ever." Mr. Avery has proposed rather insistently (in one thread after another) that "God blessed" is a compound adjective and the 2nd clause simply means Christ is blessed by God.

In the Greek, however, "God blessed" is two words in the nominative case: a noun θεὸς (God) and an adjective εὐλογητὸς (blessed). The two nominatives like this, where the adjective has no article, combine to form a predicate adjective construction, not a compound adjective. In Greek, every case except the nominative and vocative can receive the action of a verb or preposition. In order to form the construction proposed by Mr. Avery, an accusative or genitive construction would be necessary

We cannot bring it into English and then use it to form a compound adjective; this would be corrupting the text through exposition. Though repeatedly offered correction on this point, Mr. Avery continues to assert (with no background in the Greek language) that the "natural association" of θεὸς εὐλογητὸς in Greek is that of a compound adjective.

This highlights the inherent problem of attempting to apply English rules to Greek constructions. Our Greek text follows the Textus Receptus, from which the AV is translated, and not modern emendations forcing a doxology to the Father or making "Israelites" the subject. These are deliberate emendations of the text discussed elsewhere.

The English Construction​

"Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen."

How should we read it? The Greek passage is not easy to bring into English and punctuate it, so there are many attempts but all have the same general meaning: that Christ is referred to as God, and that He is blessed forever.

"who is over all"​

In this case, Christ is followed by what we call an appositive relative or nonrestrictive relative clause. What that means is that we are looking at a parenthetical clause giving additional information about who Christ is ("who is..."). We say nonrestrictive because it is not essential to the meaning of the sentence, it only gives additional information about the subject ("Christ"). No other part of the English sentence is dependent upon it.

"God blessed for ever"​

After that, we find an appositional clause that further describes Christ as "God blessed for ever." An appositional clause is a relative clause where "who is," "which is," etc. has be left out, and the relative clause is set off by commas. Mr. Avery has denied that there is an apposition here, by misapplying rules that belong to restrictive clauses, but it is in fact what we are looking at even in his own interpretation.

"blessed"​

Here is where it matters to preserve the meaning of the Greek in an English translation. As noted above, "blessed" in the Greek is a predicate adjective. It must therefore be treated the same way in the English. English allows us to form a predicate adjective in two ways:
  1. With a linking verb ("I slept well," "I am tired," "The sky is blue" "The moon is full").

  2. When "who/that is" are involved, by forming an elliptical clause ("a lamp bright enough to light the room" = "a lamp that is bright enough to light the room." When we pronounce this, there should be a slight pause between lamp and bright).
The AV translators chose the second option. To demonstrate the meaning, I'll point how to pronounce the slight pause in the passage with a dot and expressed the adjectival pronunciation:

"Christ . . . who is over all, God ˑ bles-sed for ever."​

This is not just my interpretation of the passage. It is the one handed down through the generations from ancient times.​

The Orthodox English commentators from 1611-1798 (the limited scope of my research thus far) are virtually unanimous in understanding the passage this way. The Greek writers also understand this passage as testifying of the Deity of Christ. The Socinians, Unitarians and Arians all stumbled over the passage trying to make it agreeable with their doctrine, and so numerous "alternatives" have been proposed. This is what happens when a group of individuals asserts a passage "can't mean that, so it must mean something else." Once the most obvious reading is discarded, controversial proposals follow.

The latest iteration is to add a period after "flesh" to force a doxology to the Father ("He who is God over all be blessed for ever"). This is forced punctuation based on the presupposition that Paul would not refer to Christ as God (which is itself a tacit admission that the passage, without the punctuation, refers to Christ as God). This creates a serious problem in the Greek, though when we translate we can make any interpretation sound good. The problem is that the attributive participle ὁ ὢν ("who is") most usually has an antecedent. Without an antecedent (or implied antecedent), it refers to the whole class of individuals to which the equation applies. In other words, "He who," as in "one who," in an indefinite sense. In the English, however, the resulting "He who" is used in a definite sense.

None of the Orthodox writers I have researched within this limited scope propose what Mr. Avery asserts, and not even the heterodox propose it even when it would have benefited them to do so.
 
Last edited:

Brianrw

Member
I'm willing to answer polite inquiries or polite disagreements. I will not respond to condescending or disingenuous remarks, or unsubstantiated generalities. This means the one approaching the passage is operating in an emotional sense, and is not really interested in seeking the truth.
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
The English Construction
"Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen."

How should we read it? The Greek is not easy to bring into English and punctuate it, so there are many attempts but all have the same general meaning: that Christ is referred to as God, and that He is blessed forever.

That is simply not true.

Various punctuation attempts place God being blessed as separate from Christ being over all. Some even try to make God over all. Plus I have shown you some writers that show Christ blessed forever without any apposition of Christ and God.

I'll plan on going over more later, but I was simply shocked that you would make a claim that is so obviously false.
 

Brianrw

Member
That is simply not true.

Various punctuation attempts place God being blessed as separate from Christ being over all. Some even try to make God over all. Plus I have shown you some writers that show Christ blessed forever without any apposition of Christ and God.
You've provided writers who don't quote the verse and have read Romans 9:5 into their comments. For example:

  1. Clement of Rome, who utilizes language found in multiple passages of scripture, but does not specifically quote Romans 9:5. He also does not specifically relate anything that would indicate he saw here a doxology to the Father.

  2. Eusebius, who never quotes Romans 9:5 at all, but consistently refers to "God over all."

  3. Pseudo-Ignatius (you insist, "Ignatius"), who was a fourth century interpolator whose target were the Patripassion heresies, in a spurious epistle to the Tarsians decries how he hears some are saying Christ is "God over all." But again, there is no quotation of the passage, and the forger is widely regarded to have been Arian.
If you find specific quotations that quote the passage and indicate Jesus is not the one blessed, then you are free to provide examples here. Generalities do not help.

I'll plan on going over more later, but I was simply shocked that you would make a claim that is so obviously false.
👇
Our Greek text follows the Textus Receptus, from which the AV is translated, and not modern emendations forcing a doxology to the Father or making "Israelites" the subject. These are deliberate emendations of the text discussed elsewhere.
Specifically, the punctuation forcing a doxology to the Father is under the stated assumption that Paul would not call Christ "God," which would be a very awkward and unnatural reading of the passage. The second option, where Israelites is made the subject, transposes the words and converts a present participle verb into a plural relative.
 

Brianrw

Member

Clement of Rome (1 Clement 32)​

Whoever follows this thread can judge for themselves; I believe your assertion is extraordinary and fishing for evidence. The quote you provide is as follows (I've divided it up as it is spaced and numbered in the Greek):

1. Whosoever will candidly consider each particular, will recognise the greatness of the gifts which were given by him.​
2. For from him have sprung the priests and all the Levites who minister at the altar of God. From him also [was descended] our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh. From him [arose] kings, princes, and rulers of the race of Judah. Nor are his other tribes in small glory, inasmuch as God had promised, “Thy seed shall be as the stars of heaven.”​
3. All these, therefore, were highly honoured, and made great, not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness which they wrought, but through the operation of His will.​
4. And we, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

I trust any astute reader will not find in this a quotation or even a firm reference to Romans 9:5. Least of all should we warrant from this quotation that he understands Romans 9:5 to be a doxology to the Father. It involves a switching of subjects from Christ to us mid-sentence, introducing the concept of justification, saying Almighty God has justified all men, and concludes with a doxology of praise.

The qualification (τὸ) κατὰ σάρκα "according to the flesh" as concerning the descent of Christ is not only found in Romans 9:5, but also in Acts 2:30 and Romans 1:3, 4. "To whom be glory for ever and ever" is the same form of doxology we find in Galatians 1:5, 2 Timothy 4:18, Hebrews 13:21 and a variation in Romans 11:36, not Romans 9:5. There's nothing in the passage that warrants the conclusion that the allusion here is to Romans 9:5, much less that it "strengthens the allusion and puts Clement in the non-apposition camp."
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Still waiting for you to acknowledge this was wrong.

The English Construction

"Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen."

How should we read it? The Greek passage is not easy to bring into English and punctuate it, so there are many attempts but all have the same general meaning: that Christ is referred to as God, and that He is blessed forever.
 

Brianrw

Member
That is simply not true.

Various punctuation attempts place God being blessed as separate from Christ being over all. Some even try to make God over all.
Still waiting for you to acknowledge this was wrong.
This was addressed in my original In the original post, when I wrote, "Our Greek text follows the Textus Receptus, from which the AV is translated, and not modern emendations forcing a doxology to the Father or making 'Israelites' the subject. These are deliberate emendations of the text discussed elsewhere." I quoted from the OP in response to your first statement, and then you ignored it and said you were still waiting. This is now the third place this has been noted in this thread.

I also noted in the OP that there is nothing in the Greek construction that supports the translation "blessed by God." The Greek of Romans 9:5 involves two of the most basic constructions in the Greek language:
  1. When two nominatives are involved in an equative clause, and the article is absent before one and not the other, the article designates the subject and the other is a predicate nominative.

  2. When a nominative noun and adjective of the same number and gender are juxtaposed together without a linking verb, the verb "to be" is implied. In this case, the adjective is attributive if it has the article and it is predicative if it lacks the article.
Thus far, you have not shown any of that to be wrong and therefore there is nothing to correct. The logic of your argument is as follows:
  1. The AV is the perfect word of God, which the learned men of the AV translated accurately from Greek.
  2. In Romans 9:5, I (Steven) read "God blessed" as a compound adjective.
  3. Therefore the Greek must be read as a compound adjective.
This is not a valid argument. And since you've admitted having no Greek background, simply asserting it is the natural association is not acceptable. So I will give you the space below to explain to whoever is reading:
  1. How the koine Greek construction forms a compound adjective meaning "blessed by God."
  2. Why the AV translators did not simply translate "blessed by God."
 
Last edited:
Top