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:

[1213]

How about. the Eternal Father and Mighty God, is He not the Savior of the world?

I think the God of Jesus, who raised him from death, is the Eternal Father and Mighty God.

[OneJack]

Are you denying your belief that the "Son of God and Son of Man" are flesh vessel or man?

The Son of God was the physical vessel of Jesus, but the one like a son of man is His physical manifestation in spirit vision of Daniel and of John.

I believe we had an exchanges before that the "Son of Man" is the same with the "Son of God" as physical vessel of the Father.
Would you deny that now?

What post number was that incident at?

Below is what you said on your Post#67 viewtopic.php?p=1175178#p1175178

No problem, Im withdrawing those terminologies and just use human flesh and resurrection of the Son of Man.

My apology for that mistake. The Son of God was the one who resurrected.

[Capbook]

The Son of God was the physical vessel of Jesus, but the one like a son of man is His physical manifestation in spirit vision of Daniel and of John.

I believe we had an exchanges before that the "Son of Man" is the same with the "Son of God" as physical vessel of the Father.
Would you deny that now?

What post number was that incident at?

Below is what you said on your Post#67 viewtopic.php?p=1175178#p1175178

No problem, Im withdrawing those terminologies and just use human flesh and resurrection of the Son of Man.

My apology for that mistake. The Son of God was the one who resurrected.

So, who and what is the "Son of God" to you, and who and what is the "Son of Man" to you?