Jesus as God: The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus

'ther Books by Murray J. Harris

3 Crucial Questions about Jesus Colossians and Philemon Easter in Durham: Bishop Jenkins and the Resurrection of Jesus From Grave to Glory: Resurrection in the New Testament Pauline Studies: Essays Presented to Professor F. F. Bruce on His 70th Birthday (edited with Donald A. Hagner) Raised Immortal: Resurrection and Immortality in the New Testament

Jesus as God The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus

Murray J. Harris

D. D.

BAKER BOOK HOUSE Grand Rapids, Michigan 49516

1992 by Murray J. Harris blished by Baker Books ivision of Baker Book House Company l. Box 6287, Grand Rapids, MI49516-6287

st hardcover edition published 1992 st paperback edition published 1.998 nted in the United States of America rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means-for example, electronic, photocopy, recording:hout the prior written permission of the publisher. The only exception is brief quotations in nted reviews.

Library of Congress Cataloging·in·Publication Data

Harris, Murray J. Jesus as God: the New Testament use oftheos in reference to Jesus/ MurrayJ. Harris. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0·8010·2195·2

1. Jesus Christ-Divinity-History of doctrines-Early church, ca 30-600. 2. Bible. N.T.-Criticism, interpretation, etc. 3. Theos (the Greek word) I. Title. BT216.H37 1992 232'.8'09015-dc2092-30780

. information about academic books, resources for Christian leaders, and all new releases Uable from Baker Book House, visit our web site: http://\VWW.bakerbooks.com

To David Burt, Christian brother, Esteemed friend

Contents

I IT ill N V VI V1I V1II IX X XI X1I X1II

Preface 9 Acknowledgments 15 Abbreviations 17 Introduction: Theos in the New Testament 21 The Word Was God (Jolm 1:1) 51 The Only Son, Who Is God (Jolm 1; 18) 73 My Lord and My God! (Jolm 20:28) 105 The Church of God (Acts 20,28) 131 God Blessed Forever (Romans 9:5) 143 Our Great God and Savior (Titus 2: 13) 173 The Throne of God (Psalm 45:7-8) 187 The Throne of God (Hebrews 1:&-9) 205 Our God and Savior (2 Peter 1:1) 229 The True God (1 Jolm 5:20) 239 Other Texts 255 Conclusions: Theos as a Christological Title 269 Appendixes . I The Definite Article in the Greek New Testament: Some General and Specific Principles 301 IT An Outline of the New Testament Testimony to the Deity of Christ 315 Bibliography 319 Author Index 349 Subject Index 358 Index of Principal Greek Terms and Phrases 362

7

8

Jesus as God

Reference Index 363 Old Testament 363 Old Testament Apocrypha 366 Old Testament Pseudepigrapha 367 New Testament 367 Other Ancient Authors and Writings 378

Preface Tables I. Statistical Summary of the New Testament Use of 8eoS 30

2. Prepositions with (6) 8eoS 38 3. Support for the Principal Variants in John 1:18 83 4. Modem Punctuation and Translation of Romans 9:5b 150-51 5. Jesus as 8eos in the New Testament 272

No one who turns from reading a church father such as Ignatius back to the NT can help being impressed by the remarkable reserve of the NT writers in applying the term Seas to Jesus. Nowhere in the Gospels or Epistles or the Apocalypse does one find expressions such as those ofIgnatius: I "for our God, Jesus the Christ (6 yap seoc; 1i~rov 'In<Joiic; /) XPt<J~oc;), was conceived by Mary' (Eph. 18:2); "love for Jesus C~t, our God (aya1tT)V 'In<Joii Xptmoii ~oii Swii 1i~rov)' (Rom. prooem.); "permit me to be an imitator of the passion of my God (~oii naSouC; ~oii Seoii ~ou)" (Rom. 6.3); "I give glory to Jesus C~t, the God who granted you such wisdom ('In<Joiiv Xptcr~ov ~ov Seov ... <Jocpi<Jav~a)" (Smyr. 1:1),2 And in the spurious fourth Oration against the Arians, Pseudo-Athanasius inveig]ts principally against the Marcellians in a treatise that begins "the Word is God from God (eK Swii seoc; £<J~v /) A.6yoc;),,3 and closes "so then he himself is God the Word, So ~t is the God-man, born of Mary (eha ouv Kat ainoc; /) 8eoc; A.6yoc;. Xptmoc; ouv 6 £K Mapiac; Seoc; dVSptI and 1:l';,?tI) that were used in the Hebrew OT; it denoted the one supreme God whom Jews worshiped as Creator and Redeemer; it was not infrequently found in the LXX where the sacred name ;"11;" stood in the Hebrew text. 45 Varied in application, because it could be used to refer to deity in general, a particular heathen god or goddess, pagan deities at large (along with their images), angels, human rulers or judges, persons of valor or rank, godlike persons, as well as the one true God of lsrael. What was more, on occasion it was simply equivalent (in the form ~ou BEOU) to the aQiective "mighty." Neither in LXX Greek nor in secular Greek is a firm or a fine distinction drawn between the articular and the anarthrous Beoc;,46 with 6 BwC; denoting, for example, a specific god or the supreme Deity (however conceived), and Beoc; designating deity in general or emphasizing the qualities of godhood. This is not to say that the use of the article is totally capricious or that the above distinctions are never drawn. But it does mean that in certain contexts it is as possible for 6 Beoc; to refer generically to divinity as it is for eEOC; to denote God or a particular god.

B. Analysis of the New Testament Use of eeoc; 1. Statistical Summary The statistics in table 1 reflect the uses of BEOC; in NA26 (= UBS3). Words bracketed in these editions of the Greek text have been included in the statistics. These statistics prompt some general observations. 44. To illustrate this interchangeable uie, E. Stauffer (TDNT3:90) citesAp. 2:168, and compares

nep\ aEO\) inAp. 2:169, 179,256 with nep\ 'tau 8EOU in 2:254 (TDNT3:90 n. 116). 45, Paap (124) goes so far as to claim that for Grecized Jews of the Diaspora uthe Greek word for 'God' had exactly the 'same value as the tetragram... 46. This judgment is confinned, as far as Hellenistic Greek writings contemporaneous with the NT are concerned. by Meecham, who cites specific examples from the Epistle to Diognetus.

31

Introduction: Theas in the New Testament

1. Of the 1,315 uses of ee6~ in the NT, 78.4% are articular and 21.6% Totals

'"'~'" -"'''' "''''''' "''''''

:g0)_

~'"

anarthrous 0 " ' " , 0 o " ,

ee6~

'"''''-

_,",0) '"'~o " ' - 0 ) ,",,",0) ~"'~ ~",-

O~_

"'"'-" '"'""''''

vvo


after"

Jesus as God

34 Epb. 1:3

Phil. 1:8 Phil. 3:19 Heb. 6: 10 Heb. 11: 19 Heb. 12:29 1 Pet. 1:3 Rev. 4:8 Rev. 18:8

E'liA.oyl]~ eE~ it KOtA.ia (lb). ou -yap a8t!Co~ ~ it~rov 1tiip !Ca~avaA.iO"!Cov (la). EUAOYl1~O~ I; eEOC; !Ca\ "ari]p ~oii 1CI)pio1) it~rov '1110"0;; XptO"~o;; (2a). a')'tOC; &'(tOC; a')'tOC; 1C1\ptOC; I; eEOC; I; "av~o!Cpa~Olp (2a). iOX1)poC; 1C1\ptOC; I; eEOC; 0 !Cptvac; aunjv (v.l.) (2a).

(2) lJeo.as Subject (2 Examples)61 Rom.8:33b 1 Thess. 2:5

eEOC; 0 8t!Catrov (lc).62 eeoc; ~apwc; (la).

(3) 6 8eo.as Predicate (5 Examplesy63

Mark 12:26b Acts 7:32 1 Cor. 12:6 2 Cor. 4:6 Heb.11:10

E-yrO 0 eEOC; 'A~paa~ !Ca\ 0 eEOC; 'IO"aaK !Ca\ I; eEOC; 'laKol~ (la).64 £-yrO 0 eeOC; ~rov "a~EpOlv 0"01), 0 eEOC; 'A~paa~ Ka\ 'IO"aaK Ka\ 'laKol~ (v.I.) (la).65 Ka\ 8tatpEO"etc; EvepYl1~a~Olv' Eiciv, 0 810 au~oc; eEOC;, 0 £vEP,),rov ~a "av~a EV "amv (2b). OTI 0 eeoc; 0 ei"olv ... ilC; EA.a~"'EV (2b). .."v ... "OAtV Tic; ~EXV\~C; Ka\ B1l~to1)pyOC; 0 6EOC; (3a).

(4) 8eo.as Predicate (8 Examples) 1 Cor. 8:4 1 Cor. 8:6 2 Cor. 1:21 2 Cor. 5:5 Eph.4:6

OU8E\C; eeoc; Ei ~it Eic; (2c). aA.A.' it~lv Etc; eeOC; 0 "anjp (2c). 0 810 ~E~atroV it~ac; crtJv u~lv eic; XPtO"~ov !Ca\ xptO"ac; it~ac; eEOC; (3b). 810 Ka~Ep')'aO"a~oc; it~ac; Eic; au~o ~o;;~o eEOC; (3b). Eic; eEOC; Ka\ "ari]p "anOlv (2c).

o

61. Some render Rom. 9:5 as "God(, who is over all,) be blessed for ever" (see below, chapter VI §D). 62. This may be punctuated as a question or exclamation rather than as a statement 63. Some render Heb. 1:8 as "your throne is God" (see below, chapter IX §C.l). 64. This is reckoned as asingle example since EyroOCCUIS only once. NA26/UBSJ brackets the final two occurrences of 6 before ero~. 65. Here the second 6 Be6 A6y0~ 1tpO~ ~ov eEOV lCat eEO~ ljv. Moreover, in the other three uses of I> A6yo~ in the Prologue (w. 1a, 1b, 14), the word is unqualified. There is therefore no adequate reason to reject the customary punctuation: lCat eEO~ ljv" A6yo~. Three further matters demand attention with regard to this clause. Can the Logos be identified with Jesus Christ? Why is eEO~ anarthrous? How should eEO~ be translated?

2. Identity of the Logos One of the crucial ingredients in the Christology of J. A. T. Robinson is his thesis that the divine Logos or the Christ was defined in, but not confined to, Jesus of Nazareth: "The early Christian message was that Jesus is the Christ-not that the Christ, or the Logos, the meaning of the mystery of life, is exclusively or exhaustively to be found in Jesus, so that the two are simply interchangeable."28 Only in John 1:14 does the preexistent, impersonal Logos become personalized in Jesus (Face 218): "The Logos was anhypostatic until the Word of God finally came to its full expression ... in an individual historical person, and thus became hypostatic. "29 More recently, J. D. G. Dunn has expressed similar views: Until verse 14 "wearestilldea!ing with the Wisdom and Logos figure of pre-Christian Judaism, that is, not as a personal being, but as the wise utterance of God personified" (Christotogy 242). But verse 14 may well mark "the transition from impersonal personification to actual person" (Christology 243; cf. "Christianity" 334). Accordingly "Christ is not the Logos P(ff se; he is the Logos became fl.esh. We may quite properly say that the personified Logos, the impersonal Logos first became personal in the incarnation" ("Christianity" 331).30 By way of response, several observations are in order. Nowhere in the Prologue-not even in verse 14-is the Logos explicitly identified as Jesus Christ, who is first mentioned in 1:17, yet this identification is a necessary inference, for 1:18 makes the same three affirmations of Jesus Christ as 1:1 28. Face 10; ct. 113-14, 180-85,209-10,213-14; Truth 97-129. 29. "John" 334, citing Schoonenberg 54-66, 80-9130. Dunn presses his point further. Because the Logos Christology of the Prologue prefaces the ~hole ?aspel, one may infer that the Son of God Christology oftbe discourses should be interpreted m the bghtofthe Logos Christology. "In this case bypre-existentSonJohn means pre-existentLogos; that is to say, the Son is not another divine power but is the immanent presence ofhim who alone is God from all eternity" ("Christianity" 332; similarly Partings 244-46). But earlier DUlUl had affinned that ~for John the pre-existent Logos was indeed a divine personal being" (Christology 244) and th~ "the Fourth Evangelist was the first Christian writer to conceive clearly of the personal pre-existence of the Logos-Son and to present it as a fundamental part of his message" (Christology 249).

does of the Logos (viz., timeless existence, intimate relationship with Go~, and participation in deity) and the themes of the Prologue ":fIe devel~ped m the body of the Gospel in reference to Jesus of Nazareth. But WIth this said, one should affirm that the one whom John envisaged as preeXISting with God (l:la-b; cf. 8:58; 17:4) was not Jesus of Nazareth but th~ premcarnate Son of God.32 Another relevant point is that everywhere ill the Pro33 logue the Logos is portrayed as personal. The ainov of 1: 10-12 must refer to the Jesus of human history and in the Fourth Gospel th~ ~ressI~n mEtlEIV Ei~ ~O Qvolla a'inoil (1:12) is always applied to beliefm the ~to~­ cal or exalted Jesus. And although Word and Wisdom were hypostatized ill pre-Christian Judaism and in the ancient Near East in general (see J. T. Sanders 29-57), there is no reason why John 1:1-2 should not represent an advance from any previous mere hypostatization of Logos. The Ideas of existence (l:la), relationship (l:lb), and identification (l:lc) accord perfectly with a concept of a personal Logos. In 1'14 John is not affirming that an impersonal universal Logos became incarn~te in the person of Jesus Christ, but rather that the personal individualized Logos assumed a complete and genuine human existence. If, for John the Logos was the preincarnate Son, then Jesus Christ, the Son of God ' is the incarnate Logos. There was personal continuity between the pree'xistent Logos and the historical Jesus: the A.6yo~ EvO'aplCo~ was pe.rsonally none other than the A6yo~ aO'aplCo~.lfthis is so, what John saY:' m 1:1 regarding the person of the Logos, he says, by implication, regarding the person of Jesus Christ.

ltt:-

3. Reasonsfor the Anarlhrous St.ate of eear; In light of the fact that in the preceding clause John has written ~p?r; ~ov 9EOV it would' seem fair to assume that the anarthrous state of eEO~ m 1: 1c is not without siguificance.34 It would be improper to question this ~sump: tion by arguing that since no distinction can be drawn between eEO~ and 0 31. For example,life (1:4 and 5:26), light (1:5, 9 and 3:19; 8:12; 12:35, 46), glory (1:14 and 12:41), truth (1:14,17 and 14:6).

h

b

32. But for Lampe the individual, personal identity of the historical Jesus of ~azareth. as een "retrojected" on to the Logos who thus becomes for Jolm a preexistent perso~: Jesus wnt larg~. a divine Jesus In heaven before he came down to earth" (39; cf. 128, 137). There 15 a ~way proJection of the Jesus of the Gospels on to the pre-existent Logos-Son, and of the pre-eXlStent JesusLogos-Son on to the historical figure of the New Testamen~ recor?s" (1~1). ..' • 33. John 1:10: (, 1OO00000C; (lu'tov OUKEyvOO; 1:11: 01. iSto1.(lt)'tov ot) ttetptMxpov; 1:12: 00"01. 8£ Uapov

·th e' #. this 34. It is unwise to speak, as some do, of the "omission" of the article ~ £~C;, l~r assumes without good reason that John eitherinterided to write, or ou~t ~ have wntten, ~ 9£O?, but for so~e reason failed to do sci. Even the expression "absence of the article tends to be pejorative, .suggesting as it does that the presence of the article is normative with proper or common nouns (which, In fact, is not the case-see N. Turner, Syntax 165-74).

(lu'tov.

60

Jesus as God

geo A.6yo