What did Thomas really mean?

[placebofactor]

Thomas said to Jesus, my Lord and my God referring to him as both. Yet the Jehovah's Witnesses say he was speaking of Jesus as Lord and the Father as God. Why is that incorrect?

John 20:28, “And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.” Thomas’s words were a direct address to Jesus. The text explicitly states that Thomas answered and said unto him.

The antecedent of him is Jesus, who had just appeared to Thomas and invited him to touch His wounds, John 20:27. There is no grammatical or contextual indication that Thomas suddenly shifted his words to the Father.

Thomas uses one continuous declaration: “My Lord and my God.” The Greek text is “ὁ κύριός μου καὶ ὁ θεός μου," both titles are joined by καὶ (“and”), applied to the same person. There is no suggestion of a split reference that Lord = Jesus, and God = Father. The construction is emphatic, not divided.

In John 20:29, Jesus accepts Thomas’s confession: “Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed…” If Thomas had mistakenly addressed the Father, he would have corrected him. Instead, Jesus affirms Thomas’s belief, showing that the confession was directed to Him. The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ claim that Thomas meant “Jesus as Lord, the Father as God.” This is grammatically and contextually unsupported. The text itself, in both English and Greek, shows Thomas directly confessing the deity of Christ.

Your thoughts:

[placebofactor]

[Replying to tygger too in post #10]

Thomas says to Jesus: “My Lord and my God!” In Greek it's: "ho kyrios mou kai ho theos mou"

Two titles, Lord and God, identify the full scope of who and what Jesus is. Concerning Jesus, "Greek Kyrios" speaks “one with authority.” In the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament), Kyrios is the word used to translate the divine name YHWH (the covenant name of God).

Thomas is acknowledging Jesus as the one who has rightful authority over him, not just socially, but spiritually. He is confessing Jesus as the risen sovereign, the one who commands allegiance and obedience.

The "Greek Theos" is the standard word for “God” in Greek. It refers to the one true God of Israel. Once Thomas recognized Jesus, he acknowledged him not only as Lord (authority) but as fully divine, sharing in the identity with his Father. This was a direct confession of Jesus’ deity by Thomas.

So, let's put It Together: When Thomas said, “My Lord,” He was acknowledging Jesus as the sovereign master, the one with authority over his life. As “My God,” He's acknowledging Jesus as truly divine, not just a human teacher or prophet.

Thomas’ confession is both personal (“my”) and theological (Lord + God). It’s the climactic moment of John’s Gospel, echoing the prologue: John 1:1, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”

[OneJack]

[Replying to tygger too in post #10]

Therefore, it is safe to say that when John wrote down the incident with Thomas at Jn 20:28 and used the nominative form for “My Lord” [Kurios] he was not saying that Thomas was addressing Jesus as “My Lord and my God”!

It is a big mistake to say Thomas was not addressing Jesus as ‘My Lord and my God’ because the name Jesus, together with Immanuel, Mighty God, and Eternal Father are the names of the Almighty God that He commanded to be called unto the name of the child who was called the Son of God.

Borrowing your quote, we can insert the ‘Son of God per se’ in lieu of ‘Jesus’ to view the reality in this context, thus,

“Therefore, it is safe to say that when John wrote down the incident with Thomas at Jn 20:28 and used the nominative form for “My Lord” [Kurios] he was not saying that Thomas was addressing the Son of God per se as “My Lord and my God” since he knew pretty well that the Son of God is a man like him.”

However, having said that, wittingly and unwittingly, we can conclude that ‘My Lord and my God’ is appropriately fitted to address Jesus, who was then the Spirit and Life that was in the Son of God hence the name ‘Jesus’ was prominently made known to many as the name of the Son of God.

[OneJack]

...Your thoughts:

Jesus had told God lives in him. Therefore I believe Thomas was speaking about Jesus and God, without meaning Jesus is the God.

Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I tell you, I speak not from myself; but the Father who lives in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Fa-ther, and the Father in me; or else believe me for the very works’ sake.
John 14:10-11

The reference verses reveal the reality behind the terminology 'Jesus' and 'the Son of God'. ...the Father who lives in me does his works. Meaning -
1. The Father who lives in me does his preaching, or
2. The Father who lives in me does his movement, or
3. The Father who lives in me does his talking, or
4. The Father who lives in me does everything He wishes to do.

The Father, through the Son, was the doer of all these things then. Obviously, the Son of God was His human vessel when He came in the flesh."

[OneJack]

...Your thoughts:

Jesus had told God lives in him. Therefore I believe Thomas was speaking about Jesus and God, without meaning Jesus is the God.

Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I tell you, I speak not from myself; but the Father who lives in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Fa-ther, and the Father in me; or else believe me for the very works’ sake.
John 14:10-11

1213 it appears you would like to set aside all the rules that govern both Greek and English. I'm not saying you're being dishonest, but you're sure not being honest either about the interpretation. Thomas had to be no more than one foot from Jesus when he put his fingers into his wounds. Amazed would be an understatement. At that moment he must have been looking straight into his eyes, now understanding who Jesus was. Now humbled and humiliated for not believing Jesus had risen from the grave, he looks at him, face to face, and said, "My Lord and my God."

I’m sure Thomas knew pretty well that the Son, to whom you said ‘must have been looking straight into his eyes,’ is a human like him, didn’t he?

[1213]

...
The Father, through the Son, was the doer of all these things then. Obviously, the Son of God was His human vessel when He came in the flesh."

I think Jesus was also the doer, but he wanted to do what God commanded him to do.

For I spoke not from myself, but the Father who sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. I know that his commandment is eternal life. The things therefore which I speak, even as the Father has said to me, so I speak.
John 12:49-50
Jesus therefore answered them, "My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. If anyone desires to do his will, he will know about the teaching, whether it is from God, or if I am speaking from myself.
John 7:16-17

[OneJack]

...
The Father, through the Son, was the doer of all these things then. Obviously, the Son of God was His human vessel when He came in the flesh."

I think Jesus was also the doer, but he wanted to do what God commanded him to do.

For I spoke not from myself, but the Father who sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. I know that his commandment is eternal life. The things therefore which I speak, even as the Father has said to me, so I speak.
John 12:49-50
Jesus therefore answered them, "My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. If anyone desires to do his will, he will know about the teaching, whether it is from God, or if I am speaking from myself.
John 7:16-17

It’s really Jesus who was the doer, but through the Son of God. The Lord Jesus, through the Son, would not declare He is the Almighty God because the Pharisees would directly cite Him for blasphemy, a sin for which the penalty is death by stoning.

[placebofactor]

...
The Father, through the Son, was the doer of all these things then. Obviously, the Son of God was His human vessel when He came in the flesh."

I think Jesus was also the doer, but he wanted to do what God commanded him to do.

For I spoke not from myself, but the Father who sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. I know that his commandment is eternal life. The things therefore which I speak, even as the Father has said to me, so I speak.
John 12:49-50
Jesus therefore answered them, "My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. If anyone desires to do his will, he will know about the teaching, whether it is from God, or if I am speaking from myself.
John 7:16-17

It’s really Jesus who was the doer, but through the Son of God. The Lord Jesus, through the Son, would not declare He is the Almighty God because the Pharisees would directly cite Him for blasphemy, a sin for which the penalty is death by stoning.

Jesus is the Son of God. Where the heck do you people come up with such nonsense?

[OneJack]

...
The Father, through the Son, was the doer of all these things then. Obviously, the Son of God was His human vessel when He came in the flesh."

I think Jesus was also the doer, but he wanted to do what God commanded him to do.

For I spoke not from myself, but the Father who sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. I know that his commandment is eternal life. The things therefore which I speak, even as the Father has said to me, so I speak.
John 12:49-50
Jesus therefore answered them, "My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. If anyone desires to do his will, he will know about the teaching, whether it is from God, or if I am speaking from myself.
John 7:16-17

It’s really Jesus who was the doer, but through the Son of God. The Lord Jesus, through the Son, would not declare He is the Almighty God because the Pharisees would directly cite Him for blasphemy, a sin for which the penalty is death by stoning.

Jesus is the Son of God. Where the heck do you people come up with such nonsense?

Before you make a deafening noise about Jesus, could you tell us what the Son of God is in His nature? Was He the Almighty God, or was He a man like you and me?

[1213]

...It’s really Jesus who was the doer, but through the Son of God. The Lord Jesus, through the Son...

Sorry, I think Jesus is the Son.

[OneJack]

...It’s really Jesus who was the doer, but through the Son of God. The Lord Jesus, through the Son...

Sorry, I think Jesus is the Son.

What is the Son, a man, or the Lord God?