- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote WJ, As I said I'm not trying to change your mind. There is no human on this earth that will do that, only the Holy Spirit will change your mind if we can get past our pride.
Don't waste your time trying to intimidate me to join your argument. I'm finished with you, I think
Oh BTW:
If you LOVE your neighbour as yourself you do well.
kenrch
Sorry if it seemed like I was trying to intimidate you!
I was only following your rules of logic for dialogue.
Also, I was trying to follow your examole of,,,
If you LOVE your neighbour as yourself you do well.
Blessings
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Jan. 14 2007,08:11) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 14 2007,06:35) 2. Whatever Jesus sees the Father do, “He does also”.
Hi WJ,
John 5:17 is an interesting verse, the connotation in what Yahshua said to the Jews was significant. This exegesis comes from Robertson's Word Pictures (NT) (Source):Quote John 5:17
But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.Answered (apekrinato). Regular aorist middle indicative of apokrinomai, in John here only and verse John 5:19, elsewhere apekriqh as in verse John 5:11.
My Father (o pater mou). Not “our Father,” claim to peculiar relation to the Father.
Worketh even until now (ewv arti ergazetai). Linear present middle indicative, “keeps on working until now” without a break on the Sabbath. Philo points out this fact of the continuous activity of God. Justin Martyr, Origen and others note this fact about God. He made the Sabbath for man's blessing, but cannot observe it himself.
And I work (kagw ergazomai). Jesus puts himself on a par with God's activity and thus justifies his healing on the Sabbath.
Hope this blesses you.
In Him
Hi Isaiah 1:18:Are you indicating by these quotes that Jesus was saying that to the Jews that He did not have to observe the Sabbath?
And since you are quoting someone else, is that what you believe?
God Bless
Col 2:16 Therefore let no one judge you in food or in drink, or in respect of a feast, or of the new moon, or of the sabbaths.
Col 2:17 For these are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ.Quote (942767 @ Jan. 16 2007,00:52) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Jan. 14 2007,08:11) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 14 2007,06:35) 2. Whatever Jesus sees the Father do, “He does also”.
Hi WJ,
John 5:17 is an interesting verse, the connotation in what Yahshua said to the Jews was significant. This exegesis comes from Robertson's Word Pictures (NT) (Source):Quote John 5:17
But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.Answered (apekrinato). Regular aorist middle indicative of apokrinomai, in John here only and verse John 5:19, elsewhere apekriqh as in verse John 5:11.
My Father (o pater mou). Not “our Father,” claim to peculiar relation to the Father.
Worketh even until now (ewv arti ergazetai). Linear present middle indicative, “keeps on working until now” without a break on the Sabbath. Philo points out this fact of the continuous activity of God. Justin Martyr, Origen and others note this fact about God. He made the Sabbath for man's blessing, but cannot observe it himself.
And I work (kagw ergazomai). Jesus puts himself on a par with God's activity and thus justifies his healing on the Sabbath.
Hope this blesses you.
In Him
Hi Isaiah 1:18:Are you indicating by these quotes that Jesus was saying that to the Jews that He did not have to observe the Sabbath?
And since you are quoting someone else, is that what you believe?
God Bless
Hi SDN,
What do you think “Lord of the Sabbath” means? I think that it's a sound exegesis, yes.Isa 1:18
Quote What do you think “Lord of the Sabbath” means? Here are some verses that tell who the Lord of the Sabbath is.
Mar 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God:This proves beyond doubt that the Son of man (Jesus) is the LORD thy God.
Blessings.
Quote (Cult Buster @ Jan. 16 2007,10:45) Isa 1:18 Quote What do you think “Lord of the Sabbath” means? Here are some verses that tell who the Lord of the Sabbath is.
Mar 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God:This proves beyond doubt that the Son of man (Jesus) is the LORD thy God.
Blessings.
Or it could have something to do with the fact that God gave his Son all authority.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 15 2007,15:29) Quote WJ, As I said I'm not trying to change your mind. There is no human on this earth that will do that, only the Holy Spirit will change your mind if we can get past our pride.
Don't waste your time trying to intimidate me to join your argument. I'm finished with you, I think
Oh BTW:
If you LOVE your neighbour as yourself you do well.
kenrch
Sorry if it seemed like I was trying to intimidate you!
I was only following your rules of logic for dialogue.
Also, I was trying to follow your examole of,,,
If you LOVE your neighbour as yourself you do well.
Blessings
WJ,Peace brother! Ok? It's out of my hands.
Love conquers all!
So “if you love your neighbour as yourself you do well” not to mention a brother in the Lord. That's what you are “my brother in the Lord” no matter what you think you can't change that no more than you can change your brother in the flesh.
Peace and Joy in the Holy Spirit!
Kenrch
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Jan. 16 2007,06:40) Quote (942767 @ Jan. 16 2007,00:52) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Jan. 14 2007,08:11) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 14 2007,06:35) 2. Whatever Jesus sees the Father do, “He does also”.
Hi WJ,
John 5:17 is an interesting verse, the connotation in what Yahshua said to the Jews was significant. This exegesis comes from Robertson's Word Pictures (NT) (Source):Quote John 5:17
But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.Answered (apekrinato). Regular aorist middle indicative of apokrinomai, in John here only and verse John 5:19, elsewhere apekriqh as in verse John 5:11.
My Father (o pater mou). Not “our Father,” claim to peculiar relation to the Father.
Worketh even until now (ewv arti ergazetai). Linear present middle indicative, “keeps on working until now” without a break on the Sabbath. Philo points out this fact of the continuous activity of God. Justin Martyr, Origen and others note this fact about God. He made the Sabbath for man's blessing, but cannot observe it himself.
And I work (kagw ergazomai). Jesus puts himself on a par with God's activity and thus justifies his healing on the Sabbath.
Hope this blesses you.
In Him
Hi Isaiah 1:18:Are you indicating by these quotes that Jesus was saying that to the Jews that He did not have to observe the Sabbath?
And since you are quoting someone else, is that what you believe?
God Bless
Hi SDN,
What do you think “Lord of the Sabbath” means? I think that it's a sound exegesis, yes.
Hi Isaiah 1:18:No, I don't believe that Jesus was saying that at all.
The Pharisees were accusing the disciples of breaking the Sabbath day because they were plucking ears of corn to eat.
By saying that he was Lord of the Sabbath, Jesus was saying that it was he that was to judge if some one violated the Sabbath day law.
Matthew 5:17-19 states: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no way pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. WHOSOEVER THEREFORE SHALL BREAK ONE OF THESE LEAST COMMANDMENTS, AND SHALL TEACH MEN SO, HE SHALL BE CALLED THE LEAST IN THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN: BUT WHOSOEVER SHALL DO AND TEACH THEM, THE SAME SHALL BE CALLED GREAT IN THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN.”
The Pharisees were trying to accuse Jesus of sin because he was in their view breaking the Sabbath day law by healing the sick on that day.
His responses to them follow:
“What man shall there be among you, that shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the Sabbath day, will be not lay hold on it, and lift it out? How much then is a man better than a sheep? WHEREFORE IT IS LAWFUL TO DO WELL ON THE SABBATH DAYS”. (Matt. 12:11-12)
“The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath”. (Mark 2:27-28)
The Sabbath day was instituted as a day of rest for mankind. but mankind was not to be held in bondage by the day by adding all kind of petty regulations as the Pharisees were doing. Therefore, work that was a necessity such as rescuing an animal etc. was of course not prohibited.
The work of salvation of souls is a work that there is no Sabbath rest until the day that Jesus comes for the church, and therefore, Jesus responds to the Jews who were accusing of breaking the Sabbath by saying: “My Father worketh hitherto, and I work”. (John 5:17)
God Bless
Quote (Cult Buster @ Jan. 16 2007,10:45) Isa 1:18 Quote What do you think “Lord of the Sabbath” means? Here are some verses that tell who the Lord of the Sabbath is.
Mar 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God:This proves beyond doubt that the Son of man (Jesus) is the LORD thy God.
Blessings.
Hi,I think if you look at it from this perspective, you may see it in different light.
In the Old Testament there was God. He was the Almighty, He was their only God.
In the New Testament we have been given a Messiah, the Word of God.
Therefore it makes sense that God was Lord of the Sabbath, but the Messiah is Lord of the Sabath also.Quote (Cult Buster @ Jan. 16 2007,10:45) Isa 1:18 Quote What do you think “Lord of the Sabbath” means? Here are some verses that tell who the Lord of the Sabbath is.
Mar 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God:This proves beyond doubt that the Son of man (Jesus) is the LORD thy God.
Blessings.
Nice. Thanks CB.Blessings.
Hi,
I remain staggered how some are so easily convinced by similarities rather than sound witnessed scriptural proofs.I guess if you have tied your boat to a log rather than a bollard you have to go with the flow.
Quote WJ, Peace brother! Ok? It's out of my hands.
Love conquers all!
So “if you love your neighbour as yourself you do well” not to mention a brother in the Lord. That's what you are “my brother in the Lord” no matter what you think you can't change that no more than you can change your brother in the flesh.
Peace and Joy in the Holy Spirit!
Kenrch
Kenrch
Peace to you too my friend! And many Blessings.
Quote Quote (Cult Buster @ Jan. 16 2007,10:45)
Isa 1:18Quote
What do you think “Lord of the Sabbath” means?Here are some verses that tell who the Lord of the Sabbath is.
Mar 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God:This proves beyond doubt that the Son of man (Jesus) is the LORD thy God.
Blessings.
Nice. Thanks CB.
Blessings.
NH
I am also at loss for words as how the truth can look you in the face and you not accept it!
Hi W,
If Jesus was appointed Lord over creation and all things by the greater being, his God, then that includes him being Lord of the sabbath surely.
So why does this prove that the he was also the One who appointed Him Lord??
That was His Father.Jesus (Jehovah). The Alpha and the Omega
In Revelation 1:8. I am quoting from the Jehovah's Witness’s own Bible, and it reads, “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says Jehovah God.
Ask the Witness, “What does Alpha and Omega mean?” They'll reply, “The beginning and the end.” Then ask them, “How many Alphas and Omegas can you have?” They'll answer, “Only one.” They will agree that there is only one Alpha and Omega.
Then turn to Revelation 22:12-13 which says, “Look I am coming quickly, and the reward I give is with me….I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”
Ask the Jehovah’s Witnesses, “Who do you say the Alpha and Omega is?” They will say, “Jehovah.” Now take a careful look. The Alpha and Omega in verse twelve is coming quickly. Let's see who is speaking in verse twelve.
Look at verse sixteen, “I Jesus, sent my angel to bear witness to you people of these things for the congregations. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star.”It is Jesus speaking in verse twelve. If there is any doubt go to verse 20 which says, “He that bears witness of these things says, 'Yes; I am coming quickly' Amen come Lord Jesus.” So it is clear that the Alpha and the Omega in verse twelve is Jesus.
Here is a strong proof text that Jesus is God because both Jehovah and Jesus are called the Alpha and the Omega.
Another pair of verses that are effective when used together are Isaiah 44:6 and Revelation 1:17-18. Isaiah 44:6 says,
“This is what Jehovah has said, 'The king of Israel and the Repurchaser of him, Jehovah of armies, I am the first and I am the last.'”
Ask the Jehovah’s Witnesses how many firsts and lasts can you have? It's obvious to anyone you can only have one first and one last. Ask them, “Who is the first and the last?” They will say, “Jehovah.”
Now turn to Revelation 1:17-18 which says, “Do not be fearful; I am the First and the Last, and the living one; and I became dead but look! I am living forever.” Who is speaking here? Obviously, it is Jesus for He died but is now alive, and guess what? He is called the First and the Last.
Here again we see Jesus is God.
Quote Hi W,
If Jesus was appointed Lord over creation and all things by the greater being, his God, then that includes him being Lord of the sabbath surely.
So why does this prove that the he was also the One who appointed Him Lord??
That was His Father.NH
Still resorting to that “how can he be the God of whom he is the Son of” response.
When you dont have an answer you go back to this.
God is a title. The Father and Son and the Holy Spirit are One God.
Hi W,
You should patent these new ideas.
But I prefer what Scripture teaches about the loving relationship between the Father and His son.Quote Hi W,
You should patent these new ideas.
But I prefer what Scripture teaches about the loving relationship between the Father and His son.NH
How much deeper or intimate of a relationship can one have than to be divinely, unequally, and wonderfully united together as one?
God, Father Son and Holy Spirit! This is scriptural!
Why is it so hard to concieve that The Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father and through the Holy Spirit minister and bless all of creation as one God?
Hi David,
I took the opportunity to read your post through last night and was immediately struck by two things:1. The post was written in the form of a logical argument in order to substantiate (or attempt to) the WT contention that Yahshua is not called the “Alpha and Omega” in Revelation.
2. The post was replete with logical fallacies (in fact I cannot remember reading a document with that density of logical law infractions).
I thought it might be an interesting exercise to go through the post and illustrate some of the bad logic, I know that you're aware of these fallacies, in fact a big advocate of exposing them – since you started this thread which you entitled “Five Common Fallacies”.
I don’t want you to think that by addressing the apologetic content, as apposed to the verses themselves, I’m just equivocating, and don't intend to address the scripture themselves. Rest assured, I’ll write a separate post in which I’ll look at the interpretation of the “Alpha and Omega” verses. Anyway, about the bad logic in the document:
Quote ALPHA AND OMEGA–Who does this title belong to? REVELATION 1:8
Revelation 1:8 states: “The Lord God says, ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega, the One who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty!’” (The New American Bible) Clearly, the reference here is to the Almighty, the Most High God Jehovah.
While Jesus Christ is referred to in the previous verse as “coming with the clouds,” the words of Revelation 1:8 and the surrounding verses show that he could not be “the Alpha and the Omega.” In the Scriptures, only the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ is spoken of as “the Lord God” and as the “Almighty.”
BEGGING THE QUESTION FALLACY: An argument in which the conclusion is implied or already assumed in the premises.QUESTIONABLE CAUSE FALLACY: The fallacy of questionable cause is committed when, on insufficient evidence, we identify a cause for an occurrence that has taken place or a fact that is true.
The assertion “only the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ is spoken of as “the Lord God” and as the “Almighty” has been made here, but it is unsubstantiated. Two breaches here.
Quote Jesus Christ even refers to his Father as “my God.” (John 20:17; Rev. 3:12)
NON SEQUITUR: In this fallacy the premises have no direct relationship to the conclusion.The statement “Jesus Christ even refers to his Father as “my God.”” has no bearing on the major premise of the WT argument (Jesus is not called A & O in Revelation).
Quote According to Revelation 1:1, the revelation was given to Jesus Christ by God. Hence, we should expect the words of the Almighty God to be quoted in the account. The first reference to “the Alpha and the Omega” is manifestly an example of this.
BEGGING THE QUESTION FALLACY: An argument in which the conclusion is implied or already assumed in the premises.QUESTIONABLE CAUSE FALLACY: The fallacy of questionable cause is committed when, on insufficient evidence, we identify a cause for an occurrence that has taken place or a fact that is true.
No evidence given to substantiate the assertion.
Quote REVELATION 1:11
Certain scholars hold that Rev 1:11 is spurious.
APPEAL TO AUTHORITY (or Ad verecuniam) FALLACY: This fallacy tries to convince the listener by appealing to an expert.QUESTIONABLE CAUSE FALLACY: The fallacy of questionable cause is committed when, on insufficient evidence, we identify a cause for an occurrence that has taken place or a fact that is true.
NON SEQUITUR: In this fallacy the premises have no direct relationship to the conclusion.
“Certain scholars” hold that Jesus never existed too David….
Quote The additional occurrence of this phrase (Alpha and Omega) in the King James rendering of Revelation 1:11, does not receive support from some of the oldest Greek manuscripts, including the Alexandrine, Sinaitic, and Codex Ephraemi rescriptus. It is, therefore, omitted in many modern translations. It does not appear in Revised Standard, New English, Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, Challenor-Douay Version, etc.
No breach here. A fair point – but the conclusion ignores contextual data.Quote Revelation 21:6, 7 indicates that Christians who are spiritual conquerors are to be ‘sons’ of the one known as the Alpha and the Omega. That is never said of the relationship of spirit-anointed Christians to Jesus Christ. Jesus spoke of them as his ‘brothers.’ (Heb. 2:11; Matt. 12:50; 25:40) But those ‘brothers’ of Jesus are referred to as “sons of God.” (Gal. 3:26; 4:6)
FALLACY OF EXCLUSION: Important evidence which would undermine an inductive argument is excluded from consideration.”Revelation 21:6 may or may not refer to the Father of Yahshua. But I do not dispute that the Father is the “Alpha and Omega”. So you are building a case from a moot point. It should be noted though that Yahshua is often given the title “theos” in the NT, so it stands to reason that if we are “Sons of God”, we would automatically become Sons of Yahshua, as He IS God.
Quote So this would contradict the rest of the Bible, if it was taken that Jesus was the alpha and omega of Rev 1:11.
FALSE DILEMMA FALLACY: This fallacy assumes that we must choose between two opposite extremes instead of allowing for other possibilities, especially for the possibility of choosing an alternative between the extremes.While it is true that only YHWH can be credited with the appelation “Alpha and Omega” the assertion assumes that only one person can be properly called this. This has not been proven.
Quote Again, this indicates that the alpha and omega spoken of are God Almighty, not Jesus.
QUESTIONABLE CAUSE FALLACY: The fallacy of questionable cause is committed when, on insufficient evidence, we identify a cause
for an occurrence that has taken place or a fact that is true.FALLACY OF EXCLUSION: Important evidence which would undermine an inductive argument is excluded from consideration. The requirement that all relevant information be included is called the “principle of total evidence.”
BEGGING THE QUESTION FALLACY: An argument in which the conclusion is implied or already assumed in the premises.
Assertion not substantiated, see above.
Quote THE BOOK OF REVELATION
When looking at this symbolic book, it's important to remember that a number of different ones are involved. GOD gave the revelation to JESUS who used his angel (messenger) to present it in signs to JOHN. Sometimes, John himself is speaking. Sometimes, Jesus. Sometimes God. They all seem to introduce themselves at the beginning or mention is made of them all. If it's not made clear who is speaking, I would think it is better to consult the rest of scripture. We must remember this point: The first verse of Revelation shows that the revelation was given originally by God and through Jesus Christ, hence the one speaking (through an angelic representative) at times is God himself, and at other times it is Christ Jesus. (Re 22:8)
No fallacies of logic have been committed here….although the statement:“The first verse of Revelation shows that the revelation was given originally by God and through Jesus Christ…..”
is disputable when the first verse of Revelation is examined:
Revelation 1:1
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John,It seems it was given “to” not “through” Yahshua, but that's a semantic point.
BTW, as an aside – compare these two verses from Revelation 22:
6And he said to me, “These words are faithful and true”; and the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent His angel to show to His bond-servants the things which must soon take place.
CF.
16″I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.”
Q) Who sent the angel?
Quote WHO IS THE ALMIGHTY IN THE BIBLE?
Thus Revelation 1:8 (RS) says: “‘I am the Alpha and the Omega,’ says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” Although the preceding verse speaks of Christ Jesus, it is clear that in verse 8 the application of the title is to “the Almighty” God.
BEGGING THE QUESTION FALLACY: An argument in which the conclusion is implied or already assumed in the premises.FALSE DILEMMA FALLACY: This fallacy assumes that we must choose between two opposite extremes instead of allowing for other possibilities, especially for the possibility of choosing an alternative between the extremes.
The assertion assumes that the title “The Almighty” is applicable to the Father only. This assertion has not been substantiated, therefore the dilemma created is not an authentic one.
Quote About 42 other times in the Bible the title “Almighty” is used with reference to the Father, God. It is nowhere else used with reference to Jesus!
BEGGING THE QUESTION FALLACY: An argument in which the conclusion is implied or already assumed in the premises.FALSE DILEMMA FALLACY: This fallacy assumes that we must choose between two opposite extremes instead of allowing for other possibilities, especially for the possibility of choosing an alternative between the extremes.
The assertion assumes that the title “The Almighty” is applicable to the Father only. This assertion has not been substantiated, therefore the dilemma created is not an authentic one.
The statement “About 42 other times in the Bible the title “Almighty” is used with reference to the Father, God. It is nowhere else used with reference to Jesus” has not been substantiated.
Quote This is a strong indication that this verse is speaking of the Father.
FAR-FETCHED HYPOTHESIS: A fallacy of inductive reasoning that is committed when we accept a particular hypothesis when a more acceptable hypothesis, or one more strongly based in fact, is available.FALLACY OF EXCLUSION: Important evidence which would undermine an inductive argument is excluded from consideration. The requirement that all relevant information be included is called the “principle of total evidence.”
Assertion not substantiated. Contextual evidence peripheral to Revelation 1:8 has been ignored…..
Quote Think about that: 42 other times, the word “Almighty” is used in connection with the Father, Jehovah God. And then we have this verse, we are told that the Alpha and Omega is also the “Almighty” and “God.” We know that different ones speak in this book. There is really no way to conclude anything other than this: Jehovah God is the Alpha and Omega referred to here.
QUESTIONABLE CAUSE FALLACY: The fallacy of questionable cause is committed when, on insufficient evidence, we identify a cause for an occurrence that has taken place or a fact that is true.BEGGING THE QUESTION FALLACY: An argument in which the conclusion is implied or already assumed in the premises.
FALSE DILEMMA FALLACY: This fallacy assumes that we must choose between two opposite extremes instead of allowing for other possibilities, especially for the possibility of choosing an alternative between the extremes.
The assertion “42 other times, the word “Almighty” is used in connection with the Father” has not been substantiated.
Quote In this regard Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament (1974) observes: “It cannot be absolutely certain that the writer meant to refer to the Lord Jesus specifically here . . . There is no real incongruity in supposing, also, that the writer here meant to refer to God as such.”
This borders on the “Appeal to Authority” fallacy, but Barnes is actually a often-quoted and reputable scholar. I think his statements have been taken out of context though. I mean I could have quoted this section from the exegesis, and it would appear to support my position:Quote “The obvious interpretation here would be to apply this to the Lo
rd Jesus; for(a) it is he who is spoken of in the verses preceding, and
(b) there can be no doubt that the same language is applied to him in Revelation 1:11.” (Barnes’ Notes, 1974)
But that would be more than a little dishonest….here is the full quotation from Barnes’ Notes in its entirety:
Quote “Verse 8. I am Alpha and Omega. These are the first and the last letters of the Greek alphabet, and denote properly the first and the last. So in Revelation 22:13, when the two expressions are united, “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.” So in Revelation 1:17, the speaker says of himself, “I am the first and the last.” Among the Jewish Rabbins, it was common to use the first and the last letters of the Hebrew alphabet to denote the whole of anything, from beginning to end. Thus it is said, “Adam transgressed the whole law from \^HEBREW\^ to \^HEBREW\^”–from Aleph to Tav. “Abraham kept the whole law from \^HEBREW\^ to \^HEBREW\^.” The language here is that which would properly denote eternity in the being to whom it is applied, and could be used in reference to no one but the true God. It means that he is the beginning and the end of all things; that he was at the commencement, and will be at the close; and it is thus equivalent to saying that he has always existed, and that he will always exist. Compare Isaiah 41:4, “I the Lord, the first, and with the last;'– Isaiah 44:6, “I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God;”–Isaiah 48:12, “I am he; I am the first, I also am the last.” There can be no doubt that the language here would be naturally understood as implying divinity, and it could be properly applied to no one but the true God. The obvious interpretation here would be to apply this to the Lord Jesus; for (a) it is he who is spoken of in the verses preceding, and
(b) there can be no doubt that the same language is applied to him in Revelation 1:11.
As there is, however, a difference of reading in this place in the Greek text, and as it cannot be absolutely certain that the writer meant to refer to the Lord Jesus specifically here, this cannot be adduced with propriety as a proof-text to demonstrate his divinity. Many MSS., instead of “Lord,” \~kuriov\~, read “God,” \~yeov\~; and this reading is adopted by Griesbach, Tittman, and Hahn, and is now regarded as the correct reading. There is no real incongruity in supposing, also, that the writer here meant to refer to God as such, since the introduction of a reference to him would not be inappropriate to his manifest design. Besides, a portion of the language here used, “which is, and was, and is to come,” is that which would more naturally suggest a reference to God as such, than to the Lord Jesus Christ. See Revelation 1:4. The object for which this passage referring to the “first and the last–to him who was, and is, and is to come,” is introduced here evidently is, to show that as he was clothed with omnipotence, and would continue to exist through all ages to come as he had existed in all ages past, there could be no doubt about his ability to execute all which it is said he would execute. Saith the Lord. Or, saith God, according to what is now regarded as the correct reading. Which is, and which was, etc. See Barnes “Revelation 1:4”. The Almighty. An appellation often applied to God, meaning that he has all power, and used here to denote that he is able to accomplish what is disclosed in this book.”
SOURCE: http://www.studylight.org/com/bnn/view.cgi?book=re&chapter=001
With the full text in view it’s apparent that Barnes is far from dogmatically testifying that Revelation 1:8 is a quotation of the Father of Yahshua. At best it could be said that he leans towards this verse referring the Him (and at worst; fence-sitting), but you partial quotations would imply an emphatic view. This is quite misleading, I think it's best to quote the full text, or enough of it, so that the context in which statements are made apparent.
Quote And in view of the rest of the Bible, that must in fact, be the case.
QUESTIONABLE CAUSE FALLACY: The fallacy of questionable cause is committed when, on insufficient evidence, we identify a cause for an occurrence that has taken place or a fact that is true.BEGGING THE QUESTION FALLACY: An argument in which the conclusion is implied or already assumed in the premises.
FALLACY OF EXCLUSION: Important evidence which would undermine an inductive argument is excluded from consideration. The requirement that all relevant information be included is called the “principle of total evidence.”
Assertion not substantiated.
Quote REVELATION 21:6
The title occurs again at Revelation 21:6, and the following verse identifies the speaker by saying: “Anyone conquering will inherit these things, and I shall be his God and he will be my son.” Inasmuch as Jesus referred to those who are joint heirs with him in his Kingdom as “brothers,” not “sons,” the speaker must be Jesus’ heavenly Father, Jehovah God.—Mt 25:40; compare Heb 2:10-12.
NON SEQUITUR: In this fallacy the premises have no direct relationship to the conclusion.Believers are also described as the “bride” of Christ and “bondservants” of Christ, and “sheep” of Christ….but these designations are not designed to except us from being “brothers” of Christ.
Quote REVELATION 22:12 (TODAY’S ENGLISH VERSION)
It's clear that some Bibles want this to be Jesus. At Revelation 22:12, TEV inserts the name Jesus, so the reference to Alpha and Omega in verse 13 is made to appear to apply to him. But the name Jesus does not appear there in Greek, and other translations do not include it.
No breaches here, although the omission of the name “Jesus” is neither here nor there in light of the textual data that surrounds Revelation 22:12.Quote REVELATION 22:13
The final occurrence of the title is at Revelation 22:13, which states: “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” It is evident that a number of persons are represented as speaking in this chapter of Revelation.
–Verses 8 and 9 show that the angel spoke to John,
–verse 16 obviously applies to Jesus,
–the first part of verse 17 is credited to “the spirit and the bride,”
–and the one speaking in the latter part of verse 20 is manifestly John himself.
“The Alpha and the Omega” of verses 12-15, therefore, may properly be identified as the same one who bears the title in the other two occurrences: Jehovah God.
QUESTIONABLE CAUSE FALLACY:The fallacy of questionable cause is committed when, on
insufficient evidence, we identify a cause for an occurrence that has taken place or a fact that is true.NON SEQUITUR: In this fallacy the premises have no direct relationship to the conclusion.
No textual or contextual evidence is offered to support the conclusion “The Alpha and the Omega” of verses 12-15, therefore, may properly be identified as the same one who bears the title in the other two occurrences: Jehovah God”
Quote As I said before:
“The expression, “Look! I am coming quickly,” in verse 12, does not require that these aforementioned verses apply to Jesus, inasmuch as God also speaks of himself as “coming” to execute judgment. (Compare Isa 26:21) Malachi 3:1-6 speaks of a joint coming for judgment on the part of Jehovah and his “messenger of the covenant.””
BEGGING THE QUESTION FALLACY: An argument in which the conclusion is implied or already assumed in the premises.QUESTIONABLE CAUSE FALLACY: The fallacy of questionable cause is committed when, on insufficient evidence, we identify a cause for an occurrence that has taken place or a fact that is true.
No such “joint coming” is mentioned in Mal 3:1-6, and no evidence is tendered to support this conclusion. Another assertion assumes that The Father of Yahshua is exclusively referenced in Isaiah 26:21. No proof is offered in support of this either.
Quote Of course, the coming judgment will be expressed by Jehovah God through his Son, for the apostle also says: “This will be in the day when God through Christ Jesus judges the secret things of mankind.” (Rom. 2:5-10,16)
Valid point…..no infringements of logic here….But the Son is oftentimes identified as the actual personage who is coming quickly to execute judgement, and I have found no scriptural references to the person of the Father fulfilling this role….and from the same chapter in Revelation we see this:Revelation 22:20
He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I am coming quickly ” Amen Come, Lord JesusQuote At Revelation 22:13, the Alpha and Omega is also said to be “the first and the last,” which expression is applied to Jesus at Revelation 1:17, 18. Similarly, the expression “apostle” is applied both to Jesus Christ and to certain ones of his followers. But that does not prove that they are the same person, does it? (Heb. 3:1)
FALLACY OF EXCLUSION: Important evidence which would undermine an inductive argument is excluded from consideration. The requirement that all relevant information be included is called the “principle of total evidence.”Statement ignored the context of the Hebrews and Revelation texts.
Quote The title “the Alpha and the Omega” carries the same thought as “the first and the last” and “the beginning and the end” when these terms are used with reference to Jehovah. Before him there was no Almighty God, and there will be none after him. He will bring to a successful conclusion the issue over Godship, forever vindicated as the one and only Almighty God.
ISAIAH 44:6
““This is what Jehovah has said, the King of Israel and the Repurchaser of him, Jehovah of armies, ‘I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no God.”
QUESTIONABLE CAUSE FALLACY: The fallacy of questionable cause is committed when, on insufficient evidence, we identify a cause for an occurrence that has taken place or a fact that is true.BEGGING THE QUESTION FALLACY: An argument in which the conclusion is implied or already assumed in the premises.
FALLACY OF EXCLUSION: Important evidence which would undermine an inductive argument is excluded from consideration. The requirement that all relevant information be included is called the “principle of total evidence.”
Unitarianism is assummed into the text…
My source: http://www.coping.org/write/percept/fallacies/content.htm#Non
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
