- This topic is empty.
- Posts
SF,
There is no such thing… A human Judge can only make human judgements therefore it must be that some decisions are not 'final' but there must be and end (like death) to everything.Therefore, unless you want an everlasting debate, it must be accepted that, right or wrong, there has to be a FINAL 'winner' – I did say there was a case for “Appeal”.
Can you both post a list of whom you say is on the throne to help resolve this issue, please.
Okay SF,
Now were back to what I said, and what JA is saying. Except I don't want to go 5 points at a time. One point at a time is all that is needed to eventually get there. I already posted my first one, but you wanted a judge. My point is that ONLY God sits on the throne, and Jesus is ALWAYS someone OTHER THAN GOD in Rev. The very first words of the book say,
1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants….”
The fact that it doesn't say “Father” works AGAINST you, not FOR you. If it said “Father”, then you could argue that it was meaning the “Father part of God” or whatever. But it doesn't say “Father”. It says “God”. And “God” is someone OTHER THAN Jesus Christ according to 1:1.
Now, like I asked you before you got a judge, do YOU have a verse where Jesus is called “God”?
If not, then by 21:7, it is clear that the one talking is the ONLY God even mentioned in Rev, and that God is someone OTHER THAN Jesus.
peace and love,
mikeHi Dennison,
I know you keep saying you don't want to debate whether Jesus is “God” right now. But I'm in a pickle here. The Alpha and Omega of chapter 21 is God. And that is the same one who is “seated on the throne” throughout Rev. How can I refute your claim that it is Jesus who says he is the Alpha and Omega without pointing out that it is God who says it, and God is someone other than Jesus throughout Rev.
Do you understand the dilemma I'm in?
I understand that you don't want a full blown debate about whether or not Jesus is God. But what I'm asking is how you can even think the one talking in 21 could be Jesus when Jesus is always portrayed as someone OTHER than God in Rev.
peace and love,
mikeHI Both,
Is there a problem in providing the list.
When the list is provided it will clear up the issue that is being struggled over and you can move forward much easier.
Hi JAudge,
I HATE long posts. If we each list 5 in one post, then the other has to refute 5 in one post which makes the first guy's affirmation of his first 5 and rebuttal of his opponents refutes of his first 5 take an even longer post and so on and so on.
You are seeing the crux of the problem right now anyway. This is where we've been stuck for a while because each time we get to this point, SF starts whining about how we're not suppose to be debating whether or not Jesus is God and how he only wants to start with chapter 22 and so on.
Btw Dennison, you keep talking about two thrones so how do we know who is the on seated on the throne. Check this one out,
NKJV Matt 25:31
“When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory.peace and love,
mikeRevelation 5:7
[The Lamb] came and took the scroll from the right hand of him who sat on the throne.Revelation 5:13
Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, singing: “To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory and power, for ever and ever!”Revelation 6:16
They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!Revelation 7:10
And they cried out in a loud voice: “Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.”Revelation 7:17
“for the Lamb who is in the midst of the throne will shepherd them and lead them to living fountains of waters. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.”There are my 5.
mike
Wow what is going on here… agh… taking breaks are not good.
Lets see JA, im asking you to simply put things in order and when you see someone taking advantage or being unfair, or playing games and repeating the same arguements again as if it was never answerd, thats when you step in. butttttt this isnt the case when your asking to put in end of a flow that was already was going its own way. kind of killed it, and now we have to start over in a since.
To Mike,
As i said before, and i will state this again
21 does not prove 22.
There are not in the same exact context for several differnet circumstances occured.
I believe that 22 has more of a chance to prove 21 than viseversa.But IT doesnt matter, because as i said before, i believe that 21 tlaks about the totality of God.
Why do i say this?
Becuase in the previous verse God distinctvily spoke, and i believe the totality of God, as the verses you presenetd also show that many times God and the lamb are mentioned togethor within the same throne, or at times just God sitting on the throne.
But as is said, i believe this includes the lamb.And as i said before, I would rather much focus on 22. as i started from in the begginning, becaues 21 does not prove 22.
Distinctivily we know that the one who sits on the throne is the one who is speaking on 21.
We know that before the throne, there was God speaking from heaven.
and we know after that the throne and the lamb are mentioned together many times.Now 22 is another case.
You say that we dont know when God stops speaking and when Jesus starts speaking.In reality, we do know that it was The Angel speaking to John, and that John twice tried to worship the Angel.
We know taht the Angel was sent by Jesus,
and we know that the one who is coming soon is Jesus.Ohh and to repeat again because like im barely reading some of these responses,
ya i see your in a pickle.
but if we are going to say that there are distinctive characters than i would also agrue that the one from heaven within the situation of the new jersuelm is actualy God because its stated, where as the one sitting on the throne is presented as the one seated on the throne, and that he will be a God to an individual.I also see that as being distinctive characters, something other than God. But as i said before, the throne must present something more than heaven, where it leads to my conclusions that it speaks the Total power, the total character of God.
which in my case, would include Jesus, not disclude him.
Which i understand you.
If you can say that two distinctive characters who spoke are the same being, than i can also do that, which i have.
another reponse,
mattew 25:31,
Thats why i believe that they are the same throne as i have stated. but in your case there most be two thrones becuase you believe that they are different beings, or entities or what not.Anyways im in a hurry, so idk if this reponse satsifies you or not Mike.
Hi Dennison,
This is more of a “flood” tactic than a response to the issue at hand, which is “when is Jesus ever called God?”
You are doing what you did in the post which inspired me to break all your assertions down point by point and start this thread in the first place.
In just this last post, you have claimed without any scriptural backing these things:
Quote Becuase in the previous verse God distinctvily spoke, and i believe the totality of God, as the verses you presenetd also show that many times God and the lamb are mentioned togethor within the same throne, or at times just God sitting on the throne.
The Lamb is NEVER said to be on God's throne in Rev.Quote Distinctivily we know that the one who sits on the throne is the one who is speaking on 21.
We know that before the throne, there was God speaking from heaven.
No we don't. I assert it was a herald, just like in 19:5,Revelation 19:5
Then a voice came from the throne, saying: “Praise our God, all you his servants, you who fear him, both small and great!”Now this “voice from the throne” couldn't be God, right?
Quote We know taht the Angel was sent by Jesus,
and we know that the one who is coming soon is Jesus.
And God is also said to be coming soon, as OT prophesies attest. And the Revelation came FROM God, to his Son, to an angel, to John, and to us.And there's more, but I didn't list them all. My point is that you can't just flood the thread with all these “I believes”. You are coming to your final conclusion based on 1+1+1=3, but I have proof that your “1's” aren't even “1's” at all, so your sum of “3” is arrived at by using the wrong numbers.
So do you want to actually tear this apart to closely examine it like I've been trying, or are you just happy with your false 1+1+1=3 conclusion?
If you're not interested in learning together, then fine. If you don't have the time, then fine. But I'm using of my time here also, and I'm tired of wasting it for post after post of bringing it down to the crux, just for you to flood the thread with a whole bunch of your unsubstantiated “I believes” time and again.
I believe we are on 21, where a voice came from the throne. I think it is a herald, just like 19:5…….do you agree?
mike
Hi Mike,
Its more like a summary tactic.
let me list some scriptures than how God and the Lamb are mentioned togethor
21:22And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.
21:23And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.
22:1And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
22:3And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:And the scriptures you mentioned also add to this list.
Quote “when is Jesus ever called God?”
That is not the Issue at all, this is what irritates me, you keep up making your own rules and tactics.please [Judge] for the love of God realize this.
WE are discussing whether Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega, not whether Jesus is God or called God.Quote The Lamb is NEVER said to be on God's throne in Rev.
I never said that the Lamb was on Gods throne, what i said was that they are mentioned togethor many times concerning the same throne. (which i believe, even though there are TWO thrones) and i also stated sometimes its just God himself mentioned.
This idea about the Two Thrones i learned from David by the way, i never knew about any of that until his holyspirit Thread.Quote No we don't. I assert it was a herald, just like in 19:5, Revelation 19:5
Then a voice came from the throne, saying: “Praise our God, all you his servants, you who fear him, both small and great!”Now this “voice from the throne” couldn't be God, right?
you can assert whatever you want, whats revelant is that God is speaking in 21.
And to the herald you mention is obvious where 21 is not.
The herald says “OUR” God. Its obvoius that its a herald, because it includes the speaker within worshiping God.
However ch21 does not do that at all.
Your herald is irrvealnt because your defeating your own purpose of stating that the on in the throne is speaking. It doesnt matter how you look at it, There are Two speaking.There are Two who are speaking, unless you want to believe that there is just one, like i do.
Quote And God is also said to be coming soon, as OT prophesies attest. And the Revelation came FROM God, to his Son, to an angel, to John, and to us.
lol so your defence is that God also said that. Great i know that too, but it doesnt refute anything. And for all of this distincvly as i said before, that we know that John also knew that it was Jesus coming soon. And since i believe they are one and the same, it doesnt matter.
Whether Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega at this moment doesnt really hurt or help either side.Quote And there's more, but I didn't list them all. My point is that you can't just flood the thread with all these “I believes”. You are coming to your final conclusion based on 1+1+1=3, but I have proof that your “1's” aren't even “1's” at all, so your sum of “3” is arrived at by using the wrong numbers.
Your so focused on the Trinity, when i dont care for it. Yur more Trinitarian than i am. Im not even worried about that. I dont care. all i know that there is ONE GOD. Thats it.
But since you focus so much on distinction, i have also seperated everything for you to look at. You forgot and totally do even know what your debating abotu anymore.Quote So do you want to actually tear this apart to closely examine it like I've been trying, or are you just happy with your false 1+1+1=3 conclusion?
Have you realized how Puff up you are mike? No offense but sometimes your very concieted. I never call someones idea false right away, you know why? becuase im open minded to be wrong. I rather make my self last, make my self the least, so that God can really reveal to me the truth. I am ready at any time to be proven wrong. I give everyone including you the benefit of the doubt, and sometimes i take what every one has said into consideration, regardless if they are antitrintarians or trinitarians. I do that because they are my brothers. Maybe you should stop looking at me like an enemy to defeat, and look at me like a brother. What if God is trying to show us BOTH something.Quote If you're not interested in learning together, then fine. If you don't have the time, then fine. But I'm using of my time here also, and I'm tired of wasting it for post after post of bringing it down to the crux, just for you to flood the thread with a whole bunch of your unsubstantiated “I believes” time and again.
Actually i BELIEVE you dont. and all i said above are just repititions of what i have said again, and again, and again. So lol Whatever mike.Quote I believe we are on 21, where a voice came from the throne. I think it is a herald, just like 19:5…….do you agree?
You believe oh no? shouold i waste time to respond to what you bleieve?
oh ya… thas right ur wrong, because we started with 22, which you discretly shyed away from.
Its irrevelant if its a herald or not which as i said before its possibly not. What revelant whether the one from the Throne is seperate from the one speaking from heaven.
Either way the POINT is that its the Totality of God speaking from the Throne in ch21.Get back on Topic Mike, we are still talking about the alpha and the Omega.
Hi Dennison,
I already know your summary, and I gave you mine that God starts talking in 21, then John goes with the angel, then God finishes talking in 22, then Jesus starts talking.
We did the “summary” thing pages ago. Since then, I've been trying to get past the first couple of verses in 21, so we can use that context to find out who's talking in 22. Because, like I've said, you can't come in half way through a conversation and read “he said…..” and expect to know who the “he” is. That's why we have to start in 21.
This is the part of your “summary” that addresses what we are currently discussing:
Quote you can assert whatever you want, whats revelant is that God is speaking in 21.
And to the herald you mention is obvious where 21 is not.
The herald says “OUR” God. Its obvoius that its a herald, because it includes the speaker within worshiping God.
However ch21 does not do that at all.
Your herald is irrvealnt because your defeating your own purpose of stating that the on in the throne is speaking. It doesnt matter how you look at it, There are Two speaking.Here is how I read it:
John
Herald in the area of the throne
God Himself1Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying,“Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”
5AND He who was seated on the throne said,“I am making everything new!”Then he said,“Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.”6He said to me:“It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End.
Now this fits in with 19:5, which is also obviously a herald announcing information about God and the coming events. At this point, there is no mention of Jesus or “the Lamb”, so why “imagine” Jesus into these sentences? Do you see the “AND” I bolded in verse 5? It is in the Greek, although the NIV that I quoted omits it, so I added it. The “AND” seems to signify it is at this time that God actually starts talking personally.
The bottom line is that it is God, not the Lamb who says He is the Alpha and Omega in verse 6 because as I've shown, Jesus is always someone other than God in Rev (and also in real life).
Now it isn't crucial to our debate who the herald is, or if there even is one. For our purposes here, it doesn't matter one bit if you want to think it was God Himself talking in 3 and 4 or even if it was the Lamb. The point is that it is God, or “the one seated on the throne” – not Jesus or “the Lamb” that says He is the Alpha and Omega in 6.
Are we in agreement on this point only so far?
mike
Mike,
Quote I already know your summary, and I gave you mine that God starts talking in 21, then John goes with the angel, then God finishes talking in 22, then Jesus starts talking. We did the “summary” thing pages ago. Since then, I've been trying to get past the first couple of verses in 21, so we can use that context to find out who's talking in 22. Because, like I've said, you can't come in half way through a conversation and read “he said…..” and expect to know who the “he” is. That's why we have to start in 21.
Than if you already know stop accusing me of flooding and that im being diffcult.AND as i said, 21 DOES NOT PROVE 22. TWO DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES!!
You will never be able to prove 22 with 21. And i know thats why your trying so hard to focus on that. Truth is, right after the one seated on the throne speaks, the angel takes him away. There for anything that was said, ended there.ch 21 is not the extact context of 22! look at the analysis that David gave also concerning this.
Quote (david @ Aug. 22 2010,04:33) Quote I Said: HERE IS MY PROBLEM, IF Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega, that doesnt add to the Trinitarian bases of God being a Trintiy, nor does it add to the Antitrinitarian,
all it means that Jesus is the First and the Last,Just as many places in scriptures says taht Jesus is the Firstborn of all creation, the first to rise fromt he dead, and what not.
I dont see why Mike or anyone else would debate this as Jesus being God.
Its as simple as that, Jesus is the Alpaha and the Omega expressed in scriptures,Jesus definitely is called the first and the last in other places in Revelation, but in both cases it is connected to his death and resurrection. Jesus is the first and last in a very specific sense, and different from God being the first and last (eternal.)
I agree with you that Jesus simply being called first and last doesn't prove anything. (or being called Alpha and omega, which he isn't.) Two or three people can be called 'lord' and not be the same one. Two people can be called “first and last” but those words can be used in a very different sense (as they are.)
JESUS
“These are the things that he says, ‘the First and the Last,’ who became dead and came to life [again],” (REVELATION 2:8)
“I am the First [“First,” Alexandrian Manuscript, “Firstborn.”] and the Last, and the living one; and I became dead, but, look! I am living forever and ever, and I have the keys of death and of Hádes.” (REVELATION 1:17,18)I'm not sure others notice how when the scriptures speak of Jesus being the first, they connect his death to this.
REVELATION 1:5
“and from Jesus Christ, “the Faithful Witness,” “The FIRSTBORN FROM THE DEAD,”. . . “
ACTS 26:23
“Christ was to suffer and, as the FIRST to be RESURRECTED FROM THE DEAD, . . .”“
1 CORINTHIANS 15:20
“Christ has been RAISE UP FROM THE DEAD, THE FIRSTFRUITS of those who have fallen asleep [in death].”
COLOSSIANS 1:18
“he is the head of the body, the congregation. He is the BEGINNING, THE FIRSTBORN FROM THE DEAD, that he might become the one who is FIRST in all things;”So, yes, I agree that two being both called “first and last” in different ways doesn't mean they're the same being.
God many times spoke in third person as you said, in the old testament, doesnt mean it is a herald. the only way that you can really tell its a herald is to say that the person speaking includes themselves within the standards. such as when 19:5 said OUR God.
Now you did not understand anything i said about the Lamb. I said many times they are mentioned togethor, and in the ACTUAL context of 21, they are also mentioned togethor as well. I already provided the scriptures.
oh and lets not add to scriptures.
if i were to do such a thing, you would accuse me and what not and start crying how i am being unfair.As i said before many times, I agree its God, But this includes the Lamb.
Since if you want to say that the first is a herald, it wouldnt matter, becuase its was teh God from heaven speaking, not from the throne. unless you want to say there are two Gods, which i wouldnt but only one.
So again, In Distinction, the God of heaven spoke, and the one seated on the throne spoke.
period.Hi Dennison,
You said:
Quote And i know thats why your trying so hard to focus on that. Truth is, right after the one seated on the throne speaks, the angel takes him away. There for anything that was said, ended there. Exactly. And my point is that since no new speaker is mentioned at the start of 22, and since we already KNOW that it is God who says He is the Alpha and Omege in 21, and since all throughout Rev God is distinguished as someone OTHER THAN the Lamb, it is also God who says it in 22.
Do you see why I come to my conclusion? Why wouldn't John say, “When I returned to before the throne where God Himself was just speaking moments before, Jesus now started to speak…..”?
He doesn't, but in fact clarifies that God is done and Jesus is starting in verse 16.
You said:
Quote As i said before many times, I agree its God, But this includes the Lamb. I know that's what you THINK. But now why don't you show me scripturally where the Lamb was ever referred to as “God” in Rev.
One scripture at a time, and I will address them.
peace and love,
mikeMike,
Quote Exactly. And my point is that since no new speaker is mentioned at the start of 22
Claim: There is a New Speaker, and that Speaker is the Angel out of the Seven with vials WHO was sent by Jesus.
He is the one who came to end the conversation with the one seated from the throne stoped speaking and took John into a new situation. That means the A & O of 21 are not in direct context with 22 and therefore ends the possibility of that the One seated from the Throne or of heaven to continue conversating with John. That means 22 has its own seperate context.1. Rev 19:
lets go back to you herald, its obvious we know that an angel was speaking presently because John was trying to worship it in ch19. This angel told him not to.
then speech ended and John arrived in a new situation where The king of kings came and did what he needed to do.2. Identity of the One seated on the Throne:
check this out, the one seated on the throne is this
20:11And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
This is why i believe its the totality of God.But its hard to say what The one seated on the Throne Is exactly, we know its the throne of God, but than again in John also saw THRONEs according to 20:4. Everytime the throne is mentioned, its mentions both God and the lamb numerous of times. Which you could either conclude there are two thrones or just one. Again i believe that there is only one Throne because several times they are called in unison and of the river that comes out of the throne of God and of the lamb which are the source. which is why i believe its only one totality. but This point isnt really part of the topic, We again are trying to figure out if Jesus in any sense is mentioned to be the Alpha and the Omega, which he is. The first and the Last.
3.Rev 21 connection to 22 & directly from God, not an herald.
You say the lamb isnt mentioned, the Lamb is mentiened as the Husband on 21:2. and the context of the angels purpose was to show the bride of the husband which is the lamb. in context the ending results of Johns revelations in the future.Now we know that ch21 isnt a herald, at all. If anything 22 is more of a herald becuase we know that AGAIN in angel is speaking, where John AGAIN tries to worship it.
in ch21, God STOP speaking by verse 9. Where the ANGEL starts to speak to show the LAMBS wife.
9And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife. 10And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,Quote Green- The Identity of the Speaker
Red- What the Speaker said and purpose
Blue- The Speaker taking action into a new setting.
This is evidence to show that there is a new speaker, and this speaker is one of the Seven angels. And this also shows that the one who is called God, is in heaven.
IMO: For what reason i dont know. but i dont want to assume either, or make conclusions or even try to figure out what is what.4. God is in Heaven for sure:
Truth is, we know that God is in heaven, according to scriptures. we also know that verse 10 clarfies that Jersulem comes out of the “New heaven” from God. This is for sure, we can know without any doubt that this is God speaking. Why because it clarifies it. But however There is no angel as a representative to speak for God at this moment. however in verse 10 it does become a herald which makes a BIG difference. Its clear to see which is which. We know that the voice from heaven came directly from God, in turn, this is also means that the one who speaks from the throne also comes from himself, which means there is no herald until verse 9.
another example that God is in heaven
20:9And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.In conclusion: There is a new speaker after the one who is seated on the throne speaks. and that is an angel who is part of the seven vials and what not. This angel purpose was to show the lambs wife, and spoke for the husband (lamb) according to ch22.
Therefore the two (God from Heaven, God seated from the Throne) are not respresented at all, and spoke directly to John. There is no other evidence to think otherwise.
Therefore according to scriptures the one seated on the throne claimed to be the Alpha and the Omega in ch 21.P.S. Mike dont ignore all my points, I worked hard on this, and took alot of time writing this. Please read it.
Hi Dennison,
I wasn't even half way thru you post and it was obvious that you worked hard on it. You did a great job too. Let me absorb it all, and I'll reply soon.
peace and love,
mikeQuote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 23 2010,08:12) Hi Dennison, I wasn't even half way thru you post and it was obvious that you worked hard on it. You did a great job too. Let me absorb it all, and I'll reply soon.
peace and love,
mike
Thanks! Much love brother! Take whatever time you need. I wanted to add more, but than it would be off topic.**To Add:
This would be sort of an example of a case that would be used in a CF Debate. Its direct and proving the resolve(main cliam) and than 2-3 rebuttals that are short. Its a short, direct way of debating, and formal. not time to waste on making personal attacks. Just pure focus on the resolve.Just saying! maybe the next time u debate Roo, you can debate in this manner, instead of a debate that took you like a month to finish. lol. This would probably take one day for sure, 3 max.
Hello Mr. Forgiven,
The next debate I do will be a Q and A debate. Ask one question, and the other person can use as much info as he wants to explain his answer………BUT HE MUST ACTUALLY ANSWER THE QUESTION. And then he asks one of his own, and so on and so on.
You said:
Quote Claim: There is a New Speaker, and that Speaker is the Angel out of the Seven with vials WHO was sent by Jesus.
He is the one who came to end the conversation with the one seated from the throne stoped speaking and took John into a new situation. That means the A & O of 21 are not in direct context with 22 and therefore ends the possibility of that the One seated from the Throne or of heaven to continue conversating with John. That means 22 has its own seperate context.I reluctantly concur. While I see 22 as the continuation of the conversation John was having with God in 21, I can see where you consider it an entirely new context.
I would like to continue this line of reasoning though, if that's okay. I would like to address your thoughts of “the totality of God”. I can clearly show you that Jesus is ALWAYS someone OTHER THAN God in Rev, and therefore he is a separate entity from God, not a part of some “totality of God”.
I have tried to steer our debate in that direction, but you have rejected this by saying, “We're not debating whether or not Jesus is God”. But by including Jesus in some “totality of God”, you are in effect saying “Jesus is God”.
In conclusion, I will say that the Alpha and Omega is clearly God, NOT Jesus, in 1:8 and 21:6, so why would we then assume that it is Jesus in 22:13? Consider these verses,
Revelation 1:8
“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.”Revelation 21:6
He said to me: “It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life. 7He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son.”Revelation 22:13
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.”It is clear from the words themselves that 1:8 is God. And it's clear from 21:7 that it is God speaking in 21:6. So that leaves us with only 22:13. It is similar wording to the other two, and my only question remains: WHY? Why would this one instance be talking about Jesus?
The only way your understanding of it works is if Jesus IS God or part of “the totality of God” as you say. So let's not just leave that unanswered……….unless you're scared.
What do you say? I can't prove to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that 22 is also God unless I'm able to show you that Jesus is NOT God anywhere in Rev.
peace and love,
mikeMr.Nintendo 64
Your next debate is going to be a Q and A. it shuold be structured at least, so that it can go smooth. and limited so that its not forever.
Ok great im Glad we agree there is a new speaker of a sort.
Concerning the “Totality of God” When i say this, im talking about the Unknowable parts of him. Since God is unknowable and he is So powerful that being in his mere presence would kill us. Well lets not talk about presence, but know God for who he is compelelty is enough to blow up our brains. becuase he is so powerful, majestic, and eternal, we couldnt comprehend him. So thats the Totality i mentioning.
Just like Us, we have perceptions of eachother, but we dont know every single bit of info on ourselves, nor do we know eachothers thoughts, if we did, it would drive us mad.
Concering Jesus
Jesus is the one Revealing who God is not only in the gospel but in revelations as well.
You tried to steer that way because you think im trying to prove that Jesus is God which i am not. and when i say God, i mean his totality.
Jesus is not the Totality of God, but part of the Totality.
Concerning the First Chapter of Rev
The First chapter cant even be debated any further because as you said, we dont even know the true source anymore.
But 1:8 if you want to hold it to its meaning is CLEARLY not God speaking.
5And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
the context Goes back to this verse,
V6. Jesus made us kings and preists unto God HIS FATHER so clearly it speaks of the Father belonging to Jesus. so verse 6 clearly speaks about Jesus.
V7.in that same topic, it speaks of his coming saying BEHOLD when he comes in clouds, and that every eye shall see him. This speaks of Jesus as well.
1:8 is clearly Jesus speaking to John.
Ch 21
I have showed you THREE things in ch21.
1. God of Heaven is for sure God which is seperate from The Throne. This means that The God of heaven is a different person from the Throne. There IS a distinction
2. There is NO herald nor a representative speaking for God from heaven nor for the Throne.
3. That there was a new speaker so the convo ended.and i do understand that you want to continue the logic you had before. Even so, 22 has its own context that addresses to the Lamb.
Your QuestionsQuote WHY? Why would this one instance be talking about Jesus? Im not John, Nor the Angel, nor Jesus who sent the Angel, but It is clear that it speaks of Jesus, and ch1 of revelations follows the same logic, its 21 that doesnt fit within the Four occurences within the Bible.
lol Im not scared at all brother.
There is nothing TO understand. ITS NOT MY LOGIC, its what scripture states. Again all i have stated that Jesus is the First and the Last, which i have proved many times, one of my earlier post in this debate mentiond how he was called the firstborn of all creation, and i also related that do the ending of time and stuff. I think your confusd about my LOGIC, The only Logic i expressed is the Totality of God which ONLY concerns chapter 21, NOT ch.22.Regardless if there is only one scripture that says that Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega (which there isnt just one), it will still be true becasue its written in scripture.
Just as we know that Jesus is called the firstborn of all creation in ONLY one scripture.
I didnt say that Just because Jesus is called the Alpha and the Omega it proves that Jesus is God, because God is above alll time and space, so therefore being the first and the last doesnt compare. Unless you want to compare whats said in Isaiah =)
Chapter 22 is proven by its own Context. Its the SPEAKER, which who is SPEAKING is what Proves who is The Alpha and Omega in ch22. Just because you show Jesus is NOT God, doesnt prove nor disprove anything i said concerning 22. You can Prove that Jesus is not God and still will not disprove Ch22. If you Prove that Jesus is not God nor PART of Gods Totality, than you ONLY disprove Chapter 21 and my logic in that.
21 concerns his TOTALITY, not 22.
Remember i argued that the one sitting on the Throne concerns Gods Totality,
I NEVER SAID that 22 is under that same condition.Rev 1:8 (KJV)
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.Why is it that in the KJV the word GOD is not presented but ONLY LORD?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
