₦airaland Forum

AN OPEN CORRECTION TO Reno Omokri $10,000 challenge: Understanding the Greek Terms Θεόν and Θεὸς in John 1:1

Dear Mr. Reno, My attention was drawn to your post last night, where you attempted to correct one Oluoha on the Trinity and even pledged $10,000, as you often do, but ended up in a theological fallacy. You made many claims in that post, which I hope to correct later. However, one of your claims caught my attention and it refers to your fallacious eisegesis (the interpretation of a biblical text by reading into it one's own ideas) of John 1:1, claiming that “the words translated God are 'Θεόν and Θεὸς.' They are two different words. One of them, Θεόν, refers to He who sits on the Throne. The other, Θεὸς refers to God, but not He who sits on the Throne. It is the word you use for sons of God who sits on the Throne.”

Sadly, you have used this argument for a long time and it seemed that no one had called you to order or corrected you. Today, I stand to debunk your false claims and correct you. Also, dear friends, if you are reading this post, I crave your indulgence to patiently read till the end. I have numbered the points to make the reading easier:

Now, returning to John 1:1, the original Greek text reads: Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος. (In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God)

Let me break it down:
1. "πρὸς τὸν Θεόν" is translated as "with God": Here, every Greek scholar knows that the term “Θεόν” (God) is the accusative case of “Θεός,” (God) used because the preposition πρὸς (meaning "toward" or "with" requires an accusative form. This is called concordance. This phrase translates to "with God" and refers to the Father. In Biblical Greek studies, it can be understood that the accusative case simply shows the object of the preposition, and it doesn't imply a difference in nature or substance from the nominative case “Θεὸς” (God).

2. "καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος" (and God was the Word / or the Word was God): In this phrase, Θεὸς is in the nominative case because it is the subject of the clause. The nominative case is used to describe the nature or essence of the subject—in this case, ὁ Λόγος (the Word). This structure shows that the Word (Logos) shares the same divine nature as Θεός (God).

3. Unfortunately, you lack true knowledge of Biblical Greek, yet you claim that you read the Bible in original languages, particularly Greek, but embarrassed yourself when you attempted to defend yourself by saying that “the words translated God are 'Θεόν and Θεὸς.' They are two different words. One of them, Θεόν, refers to He who sits on the Throne. The other, Θεὸς refers to God, but not He who sits on the Throne.” If you (Mr. Reno) had known better you wouldn’t have used that porous argument.

4. Now, I'll demonstrate biblically that even the word “Θεὸς” which you claimed is not for the Father who sits on the Throne is frequently used for the same God the Father who sits on the throne. The difference between Θεὸς and Θεόν is not in their meaning but in their grammatical cases. Θεὸς is nominative, while Θεόν is accusative. Both refer to the same God, and the use of different cases is dictated by the structure of the sentences in Greek, not by a difference in identity or substance. Needless to say, Reno’s false argument that Θεὸς refers to a different being or a lesser divine entity is contradicted by other passages in the New Testament where Θεὸς clearly refers to the Father.

5. For example: in John 3:16, we read: "For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life." The original Greek version reads: "Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ᾽ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον."

6. In 1 Corinthians 8:6, we read: "Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live…” The original Greek version also reads: "ἀλλ᾽ ἡμῖν εἷς Θεὸς ὁ Πατὴρ, ἐξ οὗ τὰ πάντα καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς αὐτόν"

7. 1 Peter 1:3, we read: "Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!" The original Greek version also reads: "Εὐλογητὸς ὁ Θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ"

8. Now, this same word Θεὸς which we have seen referring to God the Father was equally used by Saint Thomas the Apostle to address Christ in John 20:28: “When Thomas sees the risen Christ, he exclaims, "My Lord and my God (Θεός)!" Here, Θεός is used in the nominative case to refer to Jesus, affirming His divinity in the same way Θεός is used in the nominative case for the Father.

9. And to further affirm this reality, God the Father in Hebrews 1:8 used the same word Θεός (God) to directly refer to His Son (our Lord Jesus Christ) affirming His divinity. That is, the Father also called Jesus God. Here’s the verse in English and original Greek version:
A. English: "But about the Son He says, 'Your throne, O God, will last forever and ever, a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.'"
B. Greek: "πρὸς δὲ τὸν υἱόν• Ὁ θρόνος σου, ὁ Θεός, εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ αἰῶνος, καὶ ἡ ῥάβδος τῆς εὐθύτητος ῥάβδος τῆς βασιλείας σου."

10. While Mr. Reno claims to know Greek and read Scripture in original Greek, what he does not know is that Greek, like many inflected languages, uses different cases to indicate the function of a noun, pronoun, or adjective in a sentence. There are five primary cases in Ancient Greek: Nominative, Genitive, Dative, Accusative, and Vocative.

A. NOMINATIVE: Subject or predicate nominative. Here God is written as Θεός (Theos) — used for the subject of a sentence. Example: Ὁ Θεός ἐστιν ἀγάπη. ("God is love.". This same spelling of God changes in other cases. A clear example is seen in John 1:1 and other verses I cited above in the original Greek version

B. GENITIVE: Possession, origin, relationship ("of" or "from". Here, God is written as Θεοῦ (Theou) — used to show possession, origin, or relationship. Example: ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ. ("The grace of God." A clear example is seen in Romans 1:16 in the original Greek version.

C. DATIVE: Indirect object, means, manner, location ("to," "for," or "by". Here, God is written as Θεῷ (Theōi) — used for the indirect object or to show means, manner, or location. Example: προσεύχομαι τῷ Θεῷ. ("I pray to God." A clear example is seen in Acts 20:32 in the original Greek version.

D. ACCUSATIVE: Direct object, extent of space or time ("whom" or "what". Here, God is written as Θεόν (Theon) — used for the direct object of a sentence. Example: Ὁρῶ τὸν Θεόν. ("I see God.", which is similar to John 1:1 “…with God”, which Reno erroneously interpreted to mean a different and bigger God. Another clear example is seen in Matthew 22:37 in the original Greek version.

E. VOCATIVE: Direct address (calling out to someone). Here, God is written as Θεέ (Thee) — used when directly addressing God. Example: Ὦ Θεέ, εἰσάκουσόν μου. ("O God, hear me." A clear example is seen in Matthew 27:46 in the original Greek version.

11. Notice that each case changes the ending of the noun, pronoun, or adjective, which helps determine the word’s function in the sentence, making Ancient Greek a highly inflected language.

12. In another Scriptural verse, Jesus is addressed as God (Θεοῦ - Genitive case) as seen in Acts 20:28: "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." (Greek: προσέχετε ἑαυτοῖς καὶ παντὶ τῷ ποιμνίῳ ἐν ᾧ ὑμᾶς τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ἔθετο ἐπισκόπους ποιμαίνειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἣν περιεποιήσατο διὰ τοῦ ἰδίου αἵματος).
In this verse, "God" (Θεοῦ in genitive) is contextually understood to refer to Jesus since it speaks of the church purchased with His blood, directly attributing the divine title to Christ.

13. Having established this, I dare to say that the argument of Reno is based on a gross misinterpretation and ignorance of the original Greek, which intentionally seeks to undermine the doctrine of the Trinity as presented in Scripture. I hereby challenge Mr. Reno to counter this scriptural exegesis of mine openly or even get ready for a debate, where I would not hesitate to lecture him on biblical Greek.

14. Since he has vowed on his honour, I look forward to seeing his response.

Dear @followers I rest my case for now!

Shalom!
Fr. Chinaka Justin Mbaeri, OSJ
#SoulOfAMissionary

Salewa97:
The priest should first accept the challenge before we start discussing the topic.

He should stop being reluctant and accept the challenge. It's a simple thing to do.

If he believes he has the superior knowledge, then he should stop running away from the debate.

Salewa97:
The priest should first accept the challenge before we start discussing the topic.

He should stop being reluctant and accept the challenge. It's a simple thing to do.

If he believes he has the superior knowledge, then he should stop running away from the debate.

Salewa97:
The priest should first accept the challenge before we start discussing the topic.

He should stop being reluctant and accept the challenge. It's a simple thing to do.

If he believes he has the superior knowledge, then he should stop running away from the debate.

SoNature:
Only foolish people follow and argue with Reno Omokri.

MasterJayJay:
https://www.facebook.com/61561097804733/posts/pfbid0p3G25hA7jRJsSpnZQRm2EPBmT8GTAXLYpAN38wSad7eTZeZ88FYsEWZb34ttW8qgl/?app=fbl

SoNature:
Only foolish people follow and argue with Reno Omokri.

MasterJayJay:
https://www.facebook.com/61561097804733/posts/pfbid0p3G25hA7jRJsSpnZQRm2EPBmT8GTAXLYpAN38wSad7eTZeZ88FYsEWZb34ttW8qgl/?app=fbl

Salewa97:
The priest should first accept the challenge before we start discussing the topic.

He should stop being reluctant and accept the challenge. It's a simple thing to do.

If he believes he has the superior knowledge, then he should stop running away from the debate.

Salewa97:
The priest should first accept the challenge before we start discussing the topic.

He should stop being reluctant and accept the challenge. It's a simple thing to do.

If he believes he has the superior knowledge, then he should stop running away from the debate.

Salewa97:
The priest should first accept the challenge before we start discussing the topic.

He should stop being reluctant and accept the challenge. It's a simple thing to do.

If he believes he has the superior knowledge, then he should stop running away from the debate.

MasterJayJay:
https://www.facebook.com/61561097804733/posts/pfbid0p3G25hA7jRJsSpnZQRm2EPBmT8GTAXLYpAN38wSad7eTZeZ88FYsEWZb34ttW8qgl/?app=fbl

kenny714433:
Languages have cases.
In junior seminary, I learnt Latin and French.

For Latin, translating Dominus in all it's cases will give us;

Nominative case - Dominus
Vocative case - Domine
Accusative Case - Dominum
Genitive case - Domini
Dative Case - Domino
Ablative Case - Domino

Now, those are are the first person singular for the word "Lord". Depending on the verb, the cases change. Same thing as French, Greek and Hebrew language.

Reno be majoring in his ignorance. I like how Catholic priests are intelligent.

Mindlog:
He posted to disprove Reno's fallacies, abi you think say becoming a Catholic Priest, is your regular 3 months bible school you and your lots are used to?

Gentlesniper:
Some of you sounds so pathetic that you can't make a simple comment without adding the ethnic or religious colouration to it.
You just spoke like a 5 year old child comparing their neighbour's car to his dad's car. Everything in life shouldn't be about comparison most especially along the religious and tribal lines.