Jesus Is God: Part 3

[Hidden In Him]

Another passage that I think is not well-refuted regarding Christ's Divinity is Revelations 1:13-15

First the passage:

And in the middle of the lampstands one like a son of man, clothed in a robe reaching to the feet, and girded across his breast with a golden girdle. And His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow; and his eyes were like a flame of fire; and His feet were like burnished bronze, when it has been caused to glow in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters. (Revelation 1:13-15, NASB)

The following is the argument put forward by Biblical Unitarian:

1. Many theologians have noticed the similarities between this description of Christ in Revelation and the description of the “ancient of Days” (i.e., God) in Daniel 7:9 and Ezekiel 43:2. Thus, based on the similarities between the two descriptions, these verses are used to support the Trinity... When God became visible to Daniel, He had hair “white like wool” (7:9), and from Ezekiel we learn that His voice “was like the sound of many waters” (43:2). This description is the same for Jesus Christ in Revelation 1:13-15, and thus the two are compared. Although we realize that these descriptions are similar, we would note that many things that are similar are not identical...

It is clear from Revelation 1:13-15 that both Christ and God are present, although only God is described. In the Book of Revelation, God and Christ are both present. Chapter 4 and the opening of Chapter 5 describe God on a throne with a scroll in His right hand. Then Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, “came and he took it out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne” [i.e., God] (5:7). Again, there are clearly two present: God and Christ. Nothing in the context indicates in any way that these two are somehow “one.” There is no reason to assume that. Two is two. Furthermore, why is it so amazing that the risen Christ has an appearance similar to the one that God chooses to take on when He appears to us? Since God can take on any form He wants, why would He not take on a form that he knew would be similar to His Son? This similarity does not prove identity in any way, but it does show the functional equality of Jesus Christ and God.

This argument seems to be grasping at straws. Trinitarians believe in just that - the Trinity - which means they not only believe two is two but that three is three; that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three separate Persons, yet they all exist as part of the Godhead.

The argument that Jesus simply took on "an appearance similar to the one that God chooses to take on when He appears to us," meanwhile, assumes that Christ Jesus is not capable of the same thing; that God is merely assuming a particular appearance as He wills but Jesus is incapable of doing the same thing, despite being described as having the EXACT same attributes. If Jesus had "eyes like a flame of fire, feet that were like fine brass refined in a furnace, and His voice was like the sound of many waters" like God, why are we to assume He could not take any form He wishes also? After the resurrection, Jesus ate solid food (Luke 24:41-43) yet also materialized in rooms without entering through a locked door (John 20:26), which means He was able to assume both material and immaterial forms.

I invite responses, though I may not have time for a full debate. Just thought I would spend the time I had on something worthwhile and productive instead of wasting it.

God bless,
Hidden In Him

 

[Cooper]

Another passage that I think is not well-refuted regarding Christ's Divinity is Revelations 1:13-15

First the passage:

And in the middle of the lampstands one like a son of man, clothed in a robe reaching to the feet, and girded across his breast with a golden girdle. And His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow; and his eyes were like a flame of fire; and His feet were like burnished bronze, when it has been caused to glow in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters. (Revelation 1:13-15, NASB)

The following is the argument put forward by Biblical Unitarian:

1. Many theologians have noticed the similarities between this description of Christ in Revelation and the description of the “ancient of Days” (i.e., God) in Daniel 7:9 and Ezekiel 43:2. Thus, based on the similarities between the two descriptions, these verses are used to support the Trinity... When God became visible to Daniel, He had hair “white like wool” (7:9), and from Ezekiel we learn that His voice “was like the sound of many waters” (43:2). This description is the same for Jesus Christ in Revelation 1:13-15, and thus the two are compared. Although we realize that these descriptions are similar, we would note that many things that are similar are not identical...

It is clear from Revelation 1:13-15 that both Christ and God are present, although only God is described. In the Book of Revelation, God and Christ are both present. Chapter 4 and the opening of Chapter 5 describe God on a throne with a scroll in His right hand. Then Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, “came and he took it out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne” [i.e., God] (5:7). Again, there are clearly two present: God and Christ. Nothing in the context indicates in any way that these two are somehow “one.” There is no reason to assume that. Two is two. Furthermore, why is it so amazing that the risen Christ has an appearance similar to the one that God chooses to take on when He appears to us? Since God can take on any form He wants, why would He not take on a form that he knew would be similar to His Son? This similarity does not prove identity in any way, but it does show the functional equality of Jesus Christ and God.

This argument seems to be grasping at straws. Trinitarians believe in just that - the Trinity - which means they not only believe two is two but that three is three; that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three separate Persons, yet they all exist as part of the Godhead.

The argument that Jesus simply took on "an appearance similar to the one that God chooses to take on when He appears to us," meanwhile, assumes that Christ Jesus is not capable of the same thing; that God is merely assuming a particular appearance as He wills but Jesus is incapable of doing the same thing, despite being described as having the EXACT same attributes. If Jesus had "eyes like a flame of fire, feet that were like fine brass refined in a furnace, and His voice was like the sound of many waters" like God, why are we to assume He could not take any form He wishes also? After the resurrection, Jesus ate solid food (Luke 24:41-43) yet also materialized in rooms without entering through a locked door (John 20:26), which means He was able to assume both material and immaterial forms.

I invite responses, though I may not have time for a full debate. Just thought I would spend the time I had on something worthwhile and productive instead of wasting it.

God bless,
Hidden In Him

The beginning of Revelation chapter 1 is about the temple and has little to do with the trinity. For that we need to look at verses 17-18 that tell us Jesus is the First and the Last, the God of all eternity, Lord of eternity past and eternity future.

(Rev_1:17-18) John’s reaction and Jesus’ assurance.
And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me, “Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death.” (THE ONE GOD)

a. When I saw Him, I feel at His feet as dead: John was overwhelmed by this awesome vision, even though he was an apostle who knew Jesus on this earth. Even the three years John spent with Jesus on this earth did not really prepare him to see Jesus in His heavenly glory. At this moment, John knew what a miracle it was that Jesus could shield His glory and authority while He walked this earth.

i. “Blessed position! Does the death alarm you? We are never so much alive as when we are dead at his feet.” (Spurgeon)

ii. “It matters not what aileth us if we lie at Jesus’ feet. Better be dead there than alive anywhere else.” (Spurgeon)

b. He laid His right hand on me: First, Jesus comforted John with a compassionate touch. Perhaps the touch of Jesus felt more familiar than the appearance of Jesus. Then Jesus gave John a command: Do not be afraid. John didn’t need to be afraid because He was in the presence of Jesus.

i. Jesus is the First and the Last, the God of all eternity, Lord of eternity past and eternity future.

ii. Jesus is the one who lives, and was dead, and is alive forevermore. He has the credentials of resurrection, and lives to never die again. The victory that Jesus won over sin and death was a permanent victory. He didn’t rise from the dead just to die again.

iii. Jesus is the one who has the keys of Hades and of Death. Some imagine that the devil is somehow the “lord of Hell.” Some imagine that the devil has authority or power to determine life or death. Clearly, they are wrong, for only Jesus holds the keys of Hades and of Death. We can trust that Jesus never lets the devil borrow the keys.

4. (Rev_1:19-20) Another command to write and an explanation.
“Write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after this. The mystery of the seven stars which you saw in My right hand, and the seven golden lampstands: The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands which you saw are the seven churches.”

a. Write the things: This second command to write gives us a structure to understand the Book of Revelation. John is command to write regarding the past, present, and future (from John’s perspective).

i. The things which you have seen: This means that Jesus wanted John to write the things he had just seen in his vision of the glorious, heavenly Jesus.

ii. The things which are: This means that Jesus wanted John to write about the things of his present day, the things regarding the seven churches which are in Asia.

iii. The things which will take place after this: This means that Jesus wanted John to write about the things that would happen after the things regarding the seven churches, the things of the last days.

b. The Book of Revelation is arranged in this three-part structure.
• The things which you have seen: Revelation chapter 1
• The things which are: Revelation chapters 2 and 3
• The things which will take place after this: Revelation chapters 4 through 22

c. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands which you saw are the seven churches: Jesus kindly interprets His own images. The stars in His hand represent the angels of the seven churches. The lampstands represent the seven churches themselves.

i. Why would each church have its own angel, and why does Jesus hold these angels in His hand? Some people believe that these angels are the pastors of these seven churches. This idea is based on a literal understanding of the ancient Greek word translated angel, aggelos. That word literally means “messenger,” and certainly pastors are “messengers” to churches. Others have thought that the angels might be “guardian angels” over each congregation. Some have suggested that the angels are not literal beings at all, but that they just represent the “prevailing spirit” of each church. There are strengths and weaknesses to any of these interpretations, but we do know that in some way, these angels are representatives of each congregation.

ii. Adam Clarke believed the angel of each church was its pastor. “Angel of the Church here answers exactly to that officer of the synagogue among the Jews called . . . the messenger of the Church, whose business it was to read, pray, and teach in the synagogue.” (Clarke)

iii. It is more important to notice where the angels are: the right hand of Jesus. This is a place of safety and strength. Even the “problem churches” that will be described in the next chapters are in the right hand of Jesus.

d. This was a spectacular vision, and many people wish they could have a spectacular vision like John had. But we can know the very same Jesus John saw. We can know His purity, His eternal wisdom, His searching judgment, His victory, His authority and His majesty. Each of these aspects of His nature are ours to know intimately.

i. When the think of John’s spectacular vision, we should remember where John is: imprisoned on Patmos. Jesus is often known most intimately in the midst of suffering and trials. Both John and Stephen (Act_7:54-60) saw Jesus most clearly and gloriously when in the context of suffering for the cause of Jesus. “The wrath of the wicked does but bring saints the nearer to the choice favours of God.” (Seiss)

Source: David Guzik.

 

[robert derrick]

Another passage that I think is not well-refuted regarding Christ's Divinity is Revelations 1:13-15

First the passage:

And in the middle of the lampstands one like a son of man, clothed in a robe reaching to the feet, and girded across his breast with a golden girdle. And His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow; and his eyes were like a flame of fire; and His feet were like burnished bronze, when it has been caused to glow in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters. (Revelation 1:13-15, NASB)

The following is the argument put forward by Biblical Unitarian:

1. Many theologians have noticed the similarities between this description of Christ in Revelation and the description of the “ancient of Days” (i.e., God) in Daniel 7:9 and Ezekiel 43:2. Thus, based on the similarities between the two descriptions, these verses are used to support the Trinity... When God became visible to Daniel, He had hair “white like wool” (7:9), and from Ezekiel we learn that His voice “was like the sound of many waters” (43:2). This description is the same for Jesus Christ in Revelation 1:13-15, and thus the two are compared. Although we realize that these descriptions are similar, we would note that many things that are similar are not identical...

It is clear from Revelation 1:13-15 that both Christ and God are present, although only God is described. In the Book of Revelation, God and Christ are both present. Chapter 4 and the opening of Chapter 5 describe God on a throne with a scroll in His right hand. Then Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, “came and he took it out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne” [i.e., God] (5:7). Again, there are clearly two present: God and Christ. Nothing in the context indicates in any way that these two are somehow “one.” There is no reason to assume that. Two is two. Furthermore, why is it so amazing that the risen Christ has an appearance similar to the one that God chooses to take on when He appears to us? Since God can take on any form He wants, why would He not take on a form that he knew would be similar to His Son? This similarity does not prove identity in any way, but it does show the functional equality of Jesus Christ and God.

This argument seems to be grasping at straws. Trinitarians believe in just that - the Trinity - which means they not only believe two is two but that three is three; that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three separate Persons, yet they all exist as part of the Godhead.

The argument that Jesus simply took on "an appearance similar to the one that God chooses to take on when He appears to us," meanwhile, assumes that Christ Jesus is not capable of the same thing; that God is merely assuming a particular appearance as He wills but Jesus is incapable of doing the same thing, despite being described as having the EXACT same attributes. If Jesus had "eyes like a flame of fire, feet that were like fine brass refined in a furnace, and His voice was like the sound of many waters" like God, why are we to assume He could not take any form He wishes also? After the resurrection, Jesus ate solid food (Luke 24:41-43) yet also materialized in rooms without entering through a locked door (John 20:26), which means He was able to assume both material and immaterial forms.

I invite responses, though I may not have time for a full debate. Just thought I would spend the time I had on something worthwhile and productive instead of wasting it.

God bless,
Hidden In Him

Again, there are clearly two present: God and Christ. Nothing in the context indicates in any way that these two are somehow “one.”

Not to the carnal mind that does not believe all the Scripture as they are written.

I.e. The carnal mind can read clearly, but not think clearly.

Nothing of the two being one, even with Scripture plainly saying the Three are One, will ever show the carnal mind they are one, because the carnal mind is not subject to the Scripture, to believe them as written.

Just because they carnal mind refuses it, doesn't mean it is not so:

For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar.

The whole debate is no debate at all, but only the useless efforts to argue Spiritual things with carnal minds, who can read of two, but will never believe are one.

 

[robert derrick]

Another passage that I think is not well-refuted regarding Christ's Divinity is Revelations 1:13-15

First the passage:

And in the middle of the lampstands one like a son of man, clothed in a robe reaching to the feet, and girded across his breast with a golden girdle. And His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow; and his eyes were like a flame of fire; and His feet were like burnished bronze, when it has been caused to glow in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters. (Revelation 1:13-15, NASB)

The following is the argument put forward by Biblical Unitarian:

1. Many theologians have noticed the similarities between this description of Christ in Revelation and the description of the “ancient of Days” (i.e., God) in Daniel 7:9 and Ezekiel 43:2. Thus, based on the similarities between the two descriptions, these verses are used to support the Trinity... When God became visible to Daniel, He had hair “white like wool” (7:9), and from Ezekiel we learn that His voice “was like the sound of many waters” (43:2). This description is the same for Jesus Christ in Revelation 1:13-15, and thus the two are compared. Although we realize that these descriptions are similar, we would note that many things that are similar are not identical...

It is clear from Revelation 1:13-15 that both Christ and God are present, although only God is described. In the Book of Revelation, God and Christ are both present. Chapter 4 and the opening of Chapter 5 describe God on a throne with a scroll in His right hand. Then Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, “came and he took it out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne” [i.e., God] (5:7). Again, there are clearly two present: God and Christ. Nothing in the context indicates in any way that these two are somehow “one.” There is no reason to assume that. Two is two. Furthermore, why is it so amazing that the risen Christ has an appearance similar to the one that God chooses to take on when He appears to us? Since God can take on any form He wants, why would He not take on a form that he knew would be similar to His Son? This similarity does not prove identity in any way, but it does show the functional equality of Jesus Christ and God.

This argument seems to be grasping at straws. Trinitarians believe in just that - the Trinity - which means they not only believe two is two but that three is three; that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three separate Persons, yet they all exist as part of the Godhead.

The argument that Jesus simply took on "an appearance similar to the one that God chooses to take on when He appears to us," meanwhile, assumes that Christ Jesus is not capable of the same thing; that God is merely assuming a particular appearance as He wills but Jesus is incapable of doing the same thing, despite being described as having the EXACT same attributes. If Jesus had "eyes like a flame of fire, feet that were like fine brass refined in a furnace, and His voice was like the sound of many waters" like God, why are we to assume He could not take any form He wishes also? After the resurrection, Jesus ate solid food (Luke 24:41-43) yet also materialized in rooms without entering through a locked door (John 20:26), which means He was able to assume both material and immaterial forms.

I invite responses, though I may not have time for a full debate. Just thought I would spend the time I had on something worthwhile and productive instead of wasting it.

God bless,
Hidden In Him

Why is it so amazing that the risen Christ has an appearance similar to the one that God chooses to take on when He appears to us?

What is so amazing is this concocted gibberish, just to reject Jesus as Being God in the flesh.

First it speaks of Jesus Christ only coming as an appearance of the flesh, not coming in the flesh.

Second, it speaks of God choosing to appear to us as Jesus, and yet Jesus was not God appearing to man.

What this does is completely separate Jesus Christ from any Being of His own prior to the resurrection: He was only God temporarily appearing as a man, and then that body was resurrected just to house the Spirit of Christ created in the beginning.

Unitarians are the spirit of antichrist creating a false christ.

The carnal mind refuses to be subject to the law of Christ and the truth of Scripture.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Again, there are clearly two present: God and Christ. Nothing in the context indicates in any way that these two are somehow “one.”

Not to the carnal mind that does not believe all the Scripture as they are written.

I.e. The carnal mind can read clearly, but not think clearly.

Nothing of the two being one, even with Scripture plainly saying the Three are One, will ever show the carnal mind they are one, because the carnal mind is not subject to the Scripture, to believe them as written.

Just because they carnal mind refuses it, doesn't mean it is not so:

For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar.

The whole debate is no debate at all, but only the useless efforts to argue Spiritual things with carnal minds, who can read of two, but will never believe are one.

These threads are three months old, and I'm not particularly into the debate right now. At the moment I have bigger fish to fry. I will, however, be doing teaching videos on the JW and Unitarian positions eventually, as I have more to say on it, and I will gladly tag you and Barney when I do if you still wish to talk about it then.

For now, these are the two threads I am into right here. Feel free to comment if you like:

Astral Projection: The Devil's Playground
Returning To A 19th Century Standard Of Living Soon?

 

[robert derrick]

Created Christ believers say that God has no soul, neither can He.

And I will set my tabernacle among you: and my soul shall not abhor you. And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people.

And I will destroy your high places, and cut down your images, and cast your carcases upon the carcases of your idols, and my soul shall abhor you.

The Lord God Jehovah's soul.

Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.

They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture. But be not thou far from me, O LORD: O my strength, haste thee to help me. Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog.

The Lord Jehovah prophesying of His soul Jesus on earth and upon the cross.

Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

The soul of Jesus not left in hell.

Jesus was the soul of Jehovah come in the flesh.

God the Word Jehovah spake of His soul in the Old Covenant, and God the Son allowed His soul to be pay the price for sin on the cross.

God the Father has no soul, neither God that is a Spirit, but only the Word Jehovah and God the Son have a soul.

Now, the created christ believers will need change their c=doctrine, or go to the Hebrew to show how soul is no soul when speaking of the soul of the LORD God. Or 'my' is not 'his'.

 

[robert derrick]

There is always one or two Scripture to prove doctrine of Christ, that unbelievers must twist in meaning, change by 'translation', or do away with by 'manuscript'.

In Christ Being God in the flesh, there are already several: The Word was God, and the Word was made flesh. The Son of God is the true God and eternal life. The Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost are one in heaven.

Here is some more: The Light.

He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

And 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.

And so, Jesus Christ is that true Light, the Light of life, the Light of God's glory:

This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

Scripture does not say Christ is the shining of the Light of God, nor the reflection of His glory, but is The Light, and God is Light, and so the man Christ Jesus is the God that is Light, in whom is no darkness at all, and them that walk in Him, that is the true Light, walk not in darkness.

Jesus Christ is the true Light, the true God, who is that true Light.