The Narrow Path Ministries

dwight92070 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 10:52 pm

darinhouston wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 5:13 pm

dwight92070 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 2:11 pm

Revelation 11:15 - " ... The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ; and HE will reign forever."

Who is HE that will reign forever? Obviously the answer is "our Lord ... and His Christ;"

So God the Father and Christ the Son are jointly referred to as "He".

Does that tell you anything?

Of course, they are ONE. They are God together. They are God individually.

They aren't both referred to as He. Actually, the way the greek is used, there is no word for "he" in the explicit text - it is implied by the form of the verb, but it is not being emphasized as having any import in the text. The reign itself is the thing and the likely consequence of that isn't that they are the same person (an irrational assumption from the text) but the context of Revelation being about Christ and the grammar of the sentence suggest it is "Christ's reign" that is being referred to by "he" (if at all) but that there is a co-regency of God and Messiah over the world, the Messiah having a delegated or derivative authority as suggested in Luke - being given the throne of David. I also believe that, coincidentally, Luke is the only other place in Scripture using the phrase in this sentence of the "reign."

I'm not so sure I agree with them, but I have also seen commentators suggest (in light of the connection between this and the prophecy in Luke) that the "Lord" here is a reference to Jesus and "his Christ" being a reference to David - since David had the throne and God gave it to Jesus. Interesting thought to consider - I haven't spent any time considering it, however.

Yes, they are both referred to as "He". That's the point. The translators knew that and translated it accordingly. "He" is more than implied. It wouldn't even make sense without it. Since when does the word of God need to emphasize certain words to give them more import? No, the Lord and His Christ are "the thing". There would be no reign without them. You are correct - being the same person is not the consequence of the reign. It's the other way around - the reign is the consequence of who the Lord and His Christ are. He -both the Lord and His Christ- will reign forever. Actually the text makes it very clear and rational to see that "He" is Both of them. The grammar makes no such suggestion that it is only Christ's reign. Just the opposite. It suggests that it is the reign of both of them, and yet refers to them as "He". There is no co-regency in the Godhead. There is only one God. We know God does not share His sovereignty with a man, so your interpretation cannot be correct.

The same sentence construction is used in Revelation 22:3:

"There will no longer be any curse; and the throne (only one throne here) of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and His (both God and the Lamb's) bond-servants will serve Him (both God and the Lamb); they will see His (both God and the Lamb's) face, and His (both God and the Lamb's) name will be on their foreheads."

You're simply trying to hard - the greek is interesting and determining the referent of pronouns is almost always a challenge in both Greek and English.

But, with respect to Rev 22, the use of the word "throne" is often not referring just to a piece of furniture but to the CONCEPT of rule. They are both ruling - one at the right hand of the other. One has dominion over all (God) and the other has derived and bestowed dominion over earth (the Lamb). They are both "at the throne" and in the sense used it is one rule - one throne. They aren't the same person by any reasonable theology. And suggesting a single pronoun would lead to that conclusion and it's certainly not an orthodox trinitarian position to suggest they are one and the same to the point that they would use a singular pronoun to refer to both of them - in fact, the most common proof for trinitarians is when plural pronouns are used for God.

Look at

Revelation 3:21 - To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I was victorious and sat down with my Father on his throne.

I see all of these crowded throne room passages as largely metaphoric and dealing with the spiritual concept of rule and not physical space and objects. But, even so - here Jesus describes that concept of sitting down WITH his Father on HIS throne. It isn't that Jesus "IS" the Father or that they are one and the same, but that Jesus has been granted authority as vice regent to sit along with His (separate) Father in a common rule - Jesus' dominion being over earth (Genesis creation). This is the context in which it is said later to be a single throne that in a sense is both of their thrones.

Notably, WE ALSO will sit with him on Jesus' throne. Again, it's not a different piece of furniture - it seems clear to me that it's a hierarchy of shared rule. God the Father has dominion over ALL - he gave His Son the right to rule in a smaller subset of his dominion - Jesus likewise gives us the right to rule along with him over whatever territory or dominion we have in eternity.

Looking at these passages to confirm trinitarian dogma misses the point entirely of God's revelation and the relationships between Jesus and the Father and ourselves and both Jesus and the Father.

I think we can learn a lot by just listening to the words of Jesus - all this talk about God and the Father being "one" is pretty clear if we consider Jesus' own words expounding on that notion.

John 17:

20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

If we are to be one with each other (without being the same person as each other) we are to be in Jesus and the Father just as Jesus is one with the Father. I think we all agree that we aren't going to be God by being "one" with God. "In the same way" Jesus is one with the Father. It is this sense of being "in" him that provides the unity. He also illuminates the glory passages in the same way - JUST AS God gave Jesus glory, Jesus will give that glory to us as well. Again, that doesn't make us God any more than it makes Jesus God to share in that glory. Clearly, the notion that God shares his glory with no one is meant in a different context. He will clearly share that glory with his son and his son with us.

If that doesn't make you at least consider re-evaluating how you use those unity and shared glory passages, then we really haven't got enough common ground to make discussing these issues worthwhile.

darinhouston wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2023 9:15 am

dwight92070 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 10:52 pm

darinhouston wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 5:13 pm

They aren't both referred to as He. Actually, the way the greek is used, there is no word for "he" in the explicit text - it is implied by the form of the verb, but it is not being emphasized as having any import in the text. The reign itself is the thing and the likely consequence of that isn't that they are the same person (an irrational assumption from the text) but the context of Revelation being about Christ and the grammar of the sentence suggest it is "Christ's reign" that is being referred to by "he" (if at all) but that there is a co-regency of God and Messiah over the world, the Messiah having a delegated or derivative authority as suggested in Luke - being given the throne of David. I also believe that, coincidentally, Luke is the only other place in Scripture using the phrase in this sentence of the "reign."

I'm not so sure I agree with them, but I have also seen commentators suggest (in light of the connection between this and the prophecy in Luke) that the "Lord" here is a reference to Jesus and "his Christ" being a reference to David - since David had the throne and God gave it to Jesus. Interesting thought to consider - I haven't spent any time considering it, however.

Yes, they are both referred to as "He". That's the point. The translators knew that and translated it accordingly. "He" is more than implied. It wouldn't even make sense without it. Since when does the word of God need to emphasize certain words to give them more import? No, the Lord and His Christ are "the thing". There would be no reign without them. You are correct - being the same person is not the consequence of the reign. It's the other way around - the reign is the consequence of who the Lord and His Christ are. He -both the Lord and His Christ- will reign forever. Actually the text makes it very clear and rational to see that "He" is Both of them. The grammar makes no such suggestion that it is only Christ's reign. Just the opposite. It suggests that it is the reign of both of them, and yet refers to them as "He". There is no co-regency in the Godhead. There is only one God. We know God does not share His sovereignty with a man, so your interpretation cannot be correct.

The same sentence construction is used in Revelation 22:3:

"There will no longer be any curse; and the throne (only one throne here) of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and His (both God and the Lamb's) bond-servants will serve Him (both God and the Lamb); they will see His (both God and the Lamb's) face, and His (both God and the Lamb's) name will be on their foreheads."

You're simply trying to hard - the greek is interesting and determining the referent of pronouns is almost always a challenge in both Greek and English.

But, with respect to Rev 22, the use of the word "throne" is often not referring just to a piece of furniture but to the CONCEPT of rule. They are both ruling - one at the right hand of the other. One has dominion over all (God) and the other has derived and bestowed dominion over earth (the Lamb). They are both "at the throne" and in the sense used it is one rule - one throne. They aren't the same person by any reasonable theology. And suggesting a single pronoun would lead to that conclusion and it's certainly not an orthodox trinitarian position to suggest they are one and the same to the point that they would use a singular pronoun to refer to both of them - in fact, the most common proof for trinitarians is when plural pronouns are used for God.

You're suggesting that God has dominion OVER ALL but Jesus has bestowed dominion ONLY OVER THE EARTH. But that's NOT what the verse says in Rev.11:15. I guess I have to quote it again, since you don't seem to be interpreting it correctly:

"The kingdom OF THE WORLD has become THE KINGDOM OF OUR LORD AND OF HIS CHRIST." So it is saying that BOTH the Father and the Son are over the kingdom OF THE WORLD, not JUST the Son, as you stated. This is NOT "the Father gets ALL, but the Son just gets THE EARTH".

You are elevating the Father (which is good) but demoting the Son (which is not good).

By the way, BOTH the Father and the Son are OVER ALL. And since ONLY GOD is over all, then Who does that make Jesus??

John the Baptist knew the truth: "He who comes from above (that would be Jesus) is above ALL" John 3:31. There are no exceptions - only God is above ALL. So John is clearly letting us know that Jesus is God. Again, in the same verse: "He who comes from heaven (that would be Jesus) is above all."

Matthew 28:18 Jesus said "ALL AUTHORITY has been given to Me IN HEAVEN AND ON EARTH." You say, "See, that was derived and bestowed authority from the Father."

So what? Just because the Father gave authority to the Son, does not mean that the Son is less than the Father. In our marriage, I have greater authority than my wife, but she is not less than me.

Yes, Jesus said " ... for the Father is greater than I." John 14:28 Yes, at that time, He was, but the Father was not limited in a human body, as Jesus was. Is the Father NOW greater than the Son? I don't see that anywhere in scripture.

1 Corinthians 15:28 "When ALL things are subjected to Him (Jesus), then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all." My wife is subject to me, but still not less than me.

But of course, that analogy breaks down, because my wife is NOT me, but I do believe that Jesus IS God. The apostle John confirms that, telling us that "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

You often refer to the Trinitarian dogma. It appears to me that the word "dogma" is often used as a pejorative. But whether that's how you mean it or not, I guess I'm not your typical Trinitarian. I believe the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are each God and that they are each other - as well as being distinct from each other.

darinhouston wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2023 11:58 am

I think we can learn a lot by just listening to the words of Jesus - all this talk about God and the Father being "one" is pretty clear if we consider Jesus' own words expounding on that notion.

John 17:

20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

If we are to be one with each other (without being the same person as each other) we are to be in Jesus and the Father just as Jesus is one with the Father. I think we all agree that we aren't going to be God by being "one" with God. "In the same way" Jesus is one with the Father. It is this sense of being "in" him that provides the unity. He also illuminates the glory passages in the same way - JUST AS God gave Jesus glory, Jesus will give that glory to us as well. Again, that doesn't make us God any more than it makes Jesus God to share in that glory. Clearly, the notion that God shares his glory with no one is meant in a different context. He will clearly share that glory with his son and his son with us.

If that doesn't make you at least consider re-evaluating how you use those unity and shared glory passages, then we really haven't got enough common ground to make discussing these issues worthwhile.

You can't take John 17 in a vacuum. The Bible is filled with references to Jesus being God, many of which we have been discussing for years now. Jesus is not like us, according to scripture. The Father gave Him authority over all flesh. John 17:2 We don't have that same authority. Jesus has the authority to bestow eternal life. We don't have that authority. Knowing the Father, the only true God, and Jesus Christ IS eternal life. Knowing the Father, the only true God, and US is NOT eternal life. John 17:3 Jesus was glorified with the Father before the world was. We were not. John 17:5 Jesus came forth from the Father. We did not. John 17:8 All possessions that are the Father's are also the Son's. That's not true for us. John 17:10

So in one sense, we are one with the Father and with Jesus as they are one with each other. In another sense, we can't even approach the oneness that they have with each other, since they are "both" God. I can't "re-evaluate" how I use those passages, without denying how I understand them. I think that the same is probably true for you as well. If much common ground is necessary to make discussions worthwhile, then there would be few discussions in this world. But if it's not worthwhile to you, then you have to do what you have to do.

Luke 1:16-17 - "And he (John the Baptist) will turn many of the sons of Israel back TO THE LORD THEIR GOD. It is he (John the Baptist) who will go before Him (THE LORD THEIR GOD - JESUS) ..."

Luke 1:68 - "Blessed be THE LORD GOD OF ISRAEL, for He (THE LORD GOD OF ISRAEL - JESUS) has VISITED us and accomplished redemption (JESUS DID THAT) for His (the LORD GOD OF ISRAEL - JESUS')people."

Luke 1:78 - "Because of the tender mercy of our God, with which the Sunrise from on high WILL VISIT US (WHO VISITED THEM - JESUS, THE LORD GOD OF ISRAEL), ..."

Luke 7:11-16 Jesus has just raised the widow's son from the dead and Luke tells us how the people responded in verse 16: "Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, 'A great prophet has arisen among us!' (YES - JESUS!) and, 'GOD HAS VISITED HIS PEOPLE!' (YES - JESUS!)
It's almost as if they were prophesying!

Luke 19:44 - Jesus is prophesying about the destruction of the city of Jerusalem here: "and they will level you to the ground ... BECAUSE YOU DID NOT RECOGNIZE THE TIME OF YOUR VISITATION (WHO VISITED JERUSALEM? JESUS, THE LORD GOD OF ISRAEL, THE SUNRISE FROM ON HIGH, THE ONLY ONE WHO COULD RAISE PEOPLE FROM THE DEAD - HIS APOSTLES RAISED THE DEAD ONLY BECAUSE HE GAVE THEM THAT POWER)

I won't be able to respond soon - had a contractor break a pipe in my house and back half of house flooded and damaged floors and walls (after spending more than a year repairing a similar leak from 2 years ago)- the same day, my son had his first wreck right in front of me and an hour after signing a contract to sell our boat, I got a call from the broker that it had 6 inches of water in it - so my life is full triage for a while. I will only point out the following briefly because when I scanned your post you made a good point. You are right that Jesus was granted (again - granted) all power on heaven and earth - not just earth, but it is still unclear whether the power in heaven in context there is as it relates to creation - he doesn't, for example have power over the Father - so it's clearly limited in some capacity - understanding what is meant by those words in the context of the passage is the key. It's possible the Father granted him co-reign over literally everything physical and metaphysical without limitation, but that is still derived and granted and is (like it or not) in subjugation to the Father (that isn't a value statement - it's a positional one). And it doesn't lower Jesus to say he was elevated to this station. In fact, it elevates him from "mere man just like us" status. More to say, but I can't justify further at this time.

Ephesians 5:5 - " ... has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God."
Every kingdom has only ONE king. But here we see the distinctiveness of the Son and the Father, and their ONENESS. They are the ONE KING!

Can you imagine all those who believe Jesus is God, when they stand before God, and they find out that He actually wasn't God?
I can hear God say: "There are so many scriptures that seem to indicate that He is God, and so many occasions where Jesus said things or did things, that it appears only God could say or do, and there were so many people, and even angels that worshiped Him, and only God can be worshiped, that I could see how you might make that mistake. Tell you what, I greatly honored and exalted Him Myself, so you were just imitating Me, but maybe you went just a little too far. Don't worry about it. Enter into the joys of Your Master! Now that you're up here, you can tone it down just a little bit."

On the other hand, can you imagine all those who believe that Jesus is not God, when they stand before God, and they find out that He actually WAS God?
I can hear God say: "There are so many scriptures that indicate that He is God, and so many occasions where Jesus said things or did things that only God could say or do, and there were so many people, and even angels that worshiped Him and only God can be worshiped, that I cannot see how or why you would deny that My Son is God. Tell you what, since I greatly honored Him Myself, and even called Him God, and you did not even desire to imitate Me and do the same thing, and you considered Him to be in a lower position than He really is, I am quite disappointed in you and even angry and ..."

dwight92070 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 20, 2023 1:19 pm

Can you imagine all those who believe Jesus is God, when they stand before God, and they find out that He actually wasn't God?
I can hear God say: "There are so many scriptures that seem to indicate that He is God, and so many occasions where Jesus said things or did things, that it appears only God could say or do, and there were so many people, and even angels that worshiped Him, and only God can be worshiped, that I could see how you might make that mistake. Tell you what, I greatly honored and exalted Him Myself, so you were just imitating Me, but maybe you went just a little too far. Don't worry about it. Enter into the joys of Your Master! Now that you're up here, you can tone it down just a little bit."

On the other hand, can you imagine all those who believe that Jesus is not God, when they stand before God, and they find out that He actually WAS God?
I can hear God say: "There are so many scriptures that indicate that He is God, and so many occasions where Jesus said things or did things that only God could say or do, and there were so many people, and even angels that worshiped Him and only God can be worshiped, that I cannot see how or why you would deny that My Son is God. Tell you what, since I greatly honored Him Myself, and even called Him God, and you did not even desire to imitate Me and do the same thing, and you considered Him to be in a lower position than He really is, I am quite disappointed in you and even angry and ..."

It's a good thing God tells us exactly on what basis we will be measured and adjudged.