John 20:28

Reading

Thomas makes the climactic Christological confession of the Gospel, fulfilling the Prologue's claim. The articular ho theos means "the God," not merely "divine" — this is a direct identification of Jesus as God. John records the confession approvingly; Jesus does not correct Thomas but blesses those who believe the same thing without seeing.

Reasoning

The grammar is emphatic: both kurios and theos carry the definite article and the possessive pronoun. Thomas is not making a vague exclamation but a directed theological statement — the text says he said this "to him" (autō). The entire Gospel builds toward this moment. John 20:31 states the book's purpose: that readers "may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God." Thomas's confession is the model of that faith.

Strongest counterargument

How can Jesus be Thomas's "God" while having his own God? In 20:17, just verses earlier, Jesus says "I am ascending to my God and your God." Furthermore, Jesus's response in v.29 does not affirm "yes, I am your God" — he redirects to the topic of faith. If this were the definitive declaration of his deity, would he not acknowledge it directly?

Key scholars: Richard Bauckham, D.A. Carson, Murray Harris

Reading

Several readings are possible. Thomas may be addressing an exclamation to God through Jesus — "My God!" as astonishment directed to the Father while looking at the risen Christ. Alternatively, agency theology explains it: Jesus as God's supreme visible representative can bear the title, just as the angel of YHWH was called YHWH. Psalm 35:23 provides a Jewish prayer-formula parallel.

Reasoning

John 20:17 must be read alongside 20:28. Jesus explicitly says the Father is "my God" — if Jesus has a God, he cannot simultaneously be the one God. The purpose statement in 20:31 identifies Jesus as "the Christ, the Son of God" — not "God the Son." The titles Christ and Son of God are messianic categories, not ontological deity claims in their Jewish context. Dustin Smith emphasises the immediate context: Thomas's exclamation comes just eleven verses after Jesus said "I am ascending to MY GOD and your God" (20:17). Jesus has a God. Thomas may be recognising Jesus as the supreme agent who bears the divine name, or his exclamation may be directed ultimately to the Father through Jesus — but in either case, it cannot override what Jesus himself has just said about having a God above him (see BiblicalUnitarian.com). Dale Tuggy argues that even granting Thomas calls Jesus "God," this does not establish Trinitarianism. Moses is called "God" (Exod 7:1), judges are called "gods" (Ps 82:6), the Davidic king is addressed as "God" (Ps 45:6). The Jewish semantic range of theos/elohim is far wider than post-Nicene theology admits. Being called "God" does not entail being the one God of Israel (see Tuggy, What is the Trinity?, 2017). Sean Finnegan argues that Jesus is called "God" in the agency sense — he represents God fully as God's supreme agent. This is consistent with the wider Johannine context, where Jesus says "he who has seen me has seen the Father" (14:9) without meaning he literally is the Father (see Finnegan, Restitutio, ep. 580). The deeper theological point is that the risen Jesus standing before Thomas is not less remarkable for being a genuine human being raised by God — he is more remarkable. Thomas's awe-struck response reflects the reality that God has raised a faithful human from the dead, vindicating his entire life of trust and obedience. Whether Thomas's words are a confession directed to Jesus as God's supreme representative, or an exclamation ultimately directed to the Father through Jesus, the meaning is the same: in this risen human, the reality and power of the one God are fully on display. The assumption that "high" language about Jesus requires him to be God is a false dichotomy — it is precisely his humanity that makes the resurrection a promise for all who follow him.

Strongest counterargument

The text says Thomas said these words "to him" (autō — dative, directed at Jesus). The exclamation reading is strained by this grammar. If Thomas were exclaiming to the Father, the dative "to him" referring to Jesus would be unusual and misleading in context.

Key scholars: Anthony Buzzard, James Broughton, Patrick Navas

Reading

In Jewish agency theology, the authorised agent bears the name, authority, and even the identity of the sender. The angel of YHWH is called YHWH. Moses is called "god" to Pharaoh (Exod. 7:1). Jesus, as God's supreme agent, can be addressed as "my God" without being numerically identical to the one God of Israel. Thomas recognises in the risen Jesus the full presence and authority of God.

Reasoning

This reading takes the confession seriously as directed to Jesus while explaining it within Jewish categories that do not require ontological deity. The shaliach principle ("a man's agent is as himself") provides the framework. Jesus himself appeals to agency language throughout John: "He who has seen me has seen the Father" (14:9) does not mean he is the Father but that he perfectly represents him.

Strongest counterargument

The NT agency concept does not typically involve calling the agent "God." Prophets, priests, and even Moses are never addressed as "my God" by Israelites. If this were simply agency language, it would be unprecedented in its intensity — which may suggest something more than agency is in view.

Key scholars: James McGrath, Adela Yarbro Collins, John Ashton