Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Latreuo. Never to Jesus.


  • Please log in to reply
77 replies to this topic

#1 Melchior

Melchior

    Delta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 41 posts

Posted 11 December 2006 - 09:48 PM

Trinitarians are unable to find a single instance of latreuoso given to Jesus in the NT . Jesus is always only given proskueno ( reverence), which the saints in Rev. 3:9 also receive . So proskueno is not synonymous with the special worship given to the God Almighty alone. Therefore proskueno is no proof that Jesus is God Almighty or Deity.
Realizing this problem, some trinitarians have tried to "prove" from the "LXX" the Deity of Christ by claiming Daniel's Son of Man in 7:14 received "true worship" or latria . Therefore, they say, Jesus is God because of Daniel 7:14 latreuosa. This is their so-called "proof" text"

7:14 και εδοθη αυτω εξουσια και παντα τα εθνη της γης κατα γενη και πασα δοξα αυτω λατρευουσα και η εξουσια αυτου εξουσια αιωνιος ητις ου μη αρθη και η βασιλεια αυτου ητις ου μη φθαρη

The problem is that this is the Codex syro-hexaplaris Ambrosianus 88 which is so corrupt that even the early Church did not dare use it, favouring instead Theodotian's version (2nd century AD) .
The better manuscript is Codex BA- L 22 48 51, from Theodotion which reads DOULEUSOUSIN and not LATREUOSA. Here:

14 kai autw edoqh h arxh kai h timh kai h basileia kai pantes oi laoi fulai glwssai autw douleusousin h ecousia autou ecousia aiwnios htis ou pareleusetai kai h basileia autou ou diafqarhsetai


Note also that douleusousin doesn't mean exculsive worship given to God Almighty alone, it means serve . If douleusousin was limited only to Jesus(the Son of Man of Daniel 7:14) and to God then trinitarians might even have had an inkling of a point. But douleusousin is offered to other than God and to the Son of Man (Jesus). Consider the following example:


Genesis 15:13-14 LXX: paroikon estai to sperma sou en gê ouk idia kai doulôsousin autous kai kakôsousin autous kai tapeinôsousin autous tetrakosia etê. to de ethnos, hô ean douleusôsin, krinô egô


So, another "proof" text for the supposed Deity of Christ has been shown to hold no water. Such tricks actually serve to highlight the desperation of the trinitarian position more than anything else, in my opinion.

God bless all,

Edited by Melchior, 11 December 2006 - 10:21 PM.


#2 Evangelion

Evangelion

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,352 posts

Posted 11 December 2006 - 10:30 PM

Nice one! :rofl1:

I've done a study on this myself. You will find it here.

:bye:
In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas
Imago
Credo

#3 Melchior

Melchior

    Delta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 41 posts

Posted 12 December 2006 - 12:35 AM

Nice one! :rofl1:

I've done a study on this myself. You will find it here.

:bye:



Thanks for the link Evangelion.

#4 Evangelion

Evangelion

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,352 posts

Posted 12 December 2006 - 07:14 AM

:rofl1:
In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas
Imago
Credo

#5 Melchior

Melchior

    Delta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 41 posts

Posted 12 December 2006 - 06:09 PM

What bothers me most of all are the tricks some trinitarian bibles play in order to prove Jesus "God" . The NIV is famous for this. For example it translates the word proskueno as "worship" when applied to Jesus in Matt. 2:11 but translates the same word as "fall down" when used of humans in Rev. 3:9.

Consider:

Matt. 2:11 "On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshipped him." (NIV)

Rev. 3:9,"I will make those who are of they synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars -- I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you." (NIV)

Why the bias in translation? Even a fool will realize that there is a theological agenda at work here. (To their credit however, the KJV, ASV, BBE, NWB, WEB all translate the word proskueno in Rev. 3:9 as "worship".)

The majority are tricked into thinking Jesus is "worshipped" as God after reading the NIV because the word proskueno has been inconsistently translated to give the imprssion that only Jesus is given proskueno (or "worship") .

If the trinity were a legitimate doctrine, trinitarians would not need to play such games.

Edited by Melchior, 12 December 2006 - 06:18 PM.


#6 Simpleton

Simpleton

    Rho

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,189 posts

Posted 13 December 2006 - 10:30 PM

And 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 (Re. 22:3).

serve there in that verse is the greek word "latreuo"- to perform sacred services.

#7 Evangelion

Evangelion

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,352 posts

Posted 13 December 2006 - 10:47 PM

And 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 (Re. 22:3).

serve there in that verse is the greek word "latreuo"- to perform sacred services.


True, but note that it is only applied to one person.

This has to be either the Father, or the Son.

Take your pick.
In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas
Imago
Credo

#8 Simpleton

Simpleton

    Rho

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,189 posts

Posted 13 December 2006 - 11:00 PM

True, but note that it is only applied to one person.

This has to be either the Father, or the Son.

Take your pick.

It is applied to the one God which does not exclude any of the persons of the one God.

His name is on the foreheads of those servants (Re. 22:4). That name is the name of the Father and the Son (Re. 14:1).

#9 Evangelion

Evangelion

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,352 posts

Posted 13 December 2006 - 11:07 PM


True, but note that it is only applied to one person.

This has to be either the Father, or the Son.

Take your pick.

It is applied to the one God which does not exclude any of the persons of the one God.


No it is not; it is specifically applied to one single person; hence the use of the words "he" and "his". Trinitarians do not believe that God is merely one single person, so they cannot argue that this reference is to God as a Trinity. This is further precluded by the fact that the Son is also mentioned separately.

Herein lies a problem which Trinitarianism simply cannot resolve.

His name is on the foreheads of those servants (Re. 22:4).


True.

That name is the name of the Father and the Son (Re. 14:1).


That is not what the verse says.

It says this:
Revelation 14:1
And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.

In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas
Imago
Credo

#10 Melchior

Melchior

    Delta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 41 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 01:01 AM

And 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 (Re. 22:3).

serve there in that verse is the greek word "latreuo"- to perform sacred services.


As Evangelion has already pointed out the operative word here is "he" and "his". So "take your pick" or hold your peace. Is it the person of the Father who is being worshipped here or the person of the son? Or else show us a verse from scripture which indisputably says Jesus is latreuoed. Render us speechless. Come on.

Our position is that only the Father is God and only this One is to be given latreuo. We can furnish you many, irrefutable, indisputable proofs from scripture that the Father is given latreuo. Can you do the same for your God Almighty, this so-called Jesus, God the Son?.

#11 didymus

didymus

    Xi

  • Christadelphian
  • PipPip
  • 415 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 06:31 AM

Many thanks Evangelion & Melchior for your sound Biblical instruction. Thanks also to Simpleton; it is good to see that you are still studying with us these necessary topics!

The "worship of Christ" has caused me some consternation over the years. The NIV wasn't much help, as Melchior has already made evident. All the same, i will be referencing it below for those who use it.

What is worship? The answer to this question is important, not only because Christians should know what worship is, but in discovering what worship is, we also find out who can be worshipped. Since the Bible was originally written in Hebrew and Greek, we need to begin our study of worship by looking at the Greek and Hebrew words that are translated “worship.” Unfortunately, because of the way the Greek and Hebrew words for “worship” have been translated into English, it can be difficult to learn correctly about worship from an English version of the Bible. Especially the New International Version.

The Hebrew word shachah and the Greek word proskuneo account for more than 80% of the appearances of the word “worship” in most English versions of the Bible, so these are the two words with which we want to concern ourselves. There are a few other words that are occasionally translated “worship” but have a more specific meaning outside of the idea of worship, and really should be translated differently. An example would be the Greek word latreuo, which means “to serve,” but in a few cases is translated “to worship.”

A study of the Hebrew word shachah and the Greek word proskuneo reveals that both these words mean “to bow down.” The Hebrew word shachah (Strong’s number 7812) is used of bowing or prostrating oneself, often before a superior or before God. In the King James Version, it is translated by a number of different English words, including: “worship” (99 times), “bow” (31 times), “bow down” (18 times), “obeisance” (9 times), and “reverence” (5 times).

The Greek word proskuneo (Strong’s number 4505) comes from the Greek words pros, “to” or “toward,” and kuneo, “to kiss.” It literally means to kiss the hand to (toward) someone in token of reverence, and among the Orientals, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence. Hence, in the New Testament it means kneeling or prostration to do homage or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication.

The examples of “worship” in the Bible confirms that in the biblical culture, people bowed down before those to whom they wanted to show respect or honor. Lot “worshipped” (shachah) the strangers who came to Sodom even though he had never seen them before. He prostrated himself before them to show them respect (Gen. 19:1). Moses “worshipped” (shachah) his father in law, whom he respected and honored (Ex. 18:7). Abigail “worshipped” (shachah) David. She honored him by prostrating herself before him. These three examples can be multiplied many times over, but they show that when someone wanted to honor another, he would fall down before him. The act of falling down is called “worship,” and reveals the heart of the worshipper—respect and honor towards the one being worshipped.

Many cultures besides the biblical culture have the custom of bowing to show respect or honor. The Japanese and Chinese bow to those they respect. In the courts of Europe it was customary to bow (or for women, to curtsy) to those of higher rank. In fact, even in the colonial culture of the United States it was common for men to bow in respect of one another and for the women to curtsy to show honor or respect, and occasionally we still see bowing and curtsying today.

In some churches the custom of bowing before God has been modified into kneeling or genuflecting. For example, in the Roman Catholic Church people often genuflect, a shallow bow of the knee, to show their respect to God. In most protestant churches although people no longer perform a full bow before the Lord, people “bow” their heads in prayer as a sign of respect. It is important to realize that in both biblical and modern “worship” (bowing down), the outward act of bowing reveals the inner heart of respect and honor.

Why do we use the English word “worship” at all? Our word “worship” comes from the Old English “weorthscipe,” which means worthiness. We “worship” someone because they are “worth” the respect they receive. In British English, “Worship” was actually used as a title for various officials, usually magistrates and some mayors. Thus even in the derivation of the English word “worship” we see that it was not exclusively used of God or Jesus, but was used to designate someone worth the respect they received.
When the words shachah appears in the Hebrew text, or proskuneo in the Greek text, they usually refer to the action of bowing down, and we can translate them that way into English, as the following examples show.

Genesis 23:7 (NIV)
Then Abraham rose and bowed down [shachah] before the people of the land, the Hittites.

Genesis 33:3 (NIV)
He himself [Jacob] went on ahead and bowed down [shachah] to the ground seven times as he approached his brother [Esau].

Genesis 42:6 (NIV)
Now Joseph was the governor of the land, the one who sold grain to all its people. So when Joseph’s brothers arrived, they bowed down [shachah] to him with their faces to the ground.

Matthew 18:26 (NIV)
“The servant fell on his knees [proskuneo] before him. ‘Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’

It is clear from the verses above that people “bowed down to,” or “worshipped” other people. A study of the Greek and Hebrew words and how they are translated shows something else—something that has misled many Christians. In many Bible versions, when the words shachah or proskuneo are used of one person to another, the translators use the English words “bow down” or something similar. However, when shachah or proskuneo refers to a person “bowing down” before God or Jesus, the translators almost always use the English word “worship.” The three examples below are typical.

Exodus 24:1
Then he said to Moses, “Come up to the LORD, you and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel. You are to worship [shachah] at a distance,

Exodus 33:10 (NASB)
When all the people saw the pillar of cloud standing at the entrance of the tent, all the people would arise and worship [shachah], each at the entrance of his tent.

John 4:24
God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship [proskuneo] in spirit and in truth.”

The verses above reveal a pattern that has caused many Christians to misunderstand “worship.” When the Hebrew or Greek words for worship refer to men “worshipping” men, the translators use the English words “bow down.” However, when the act of worship is toward God or Jesus, then the translators use the English word “worship” in their Bibles. This way of translating understandably leads the English reader to believe that only God and Jesus are “worshipped.” How can a person reading the English Bible be expected to know that biblical “worship” is not just for God and Jesus when in his Bible the word “worship” is only used in reference to them? He cannot. Thus, although it is sad, it is understandable that people reading the English Bible conclude that Jesus must be God because Jesus is “worshipped.”

As Bible students, we must get the facts straight. “Worshipping,” i.e., bowing down to someone, shows honor and respect. It can be toward anyone the person wants to honor, even, as we saw earlier in the case of Lot, a total stranger. People “worshipping” Jesus does not make him God any more than Abraham “bowing down” before the Hittites makes them God. The Greek and Hebrew need to be translated consistently. When they are, we can see that people “worshipped” other people and God (or they “bowed down to” other people and God). In practical application, superiors, kings, God, and Jesus get most of the honor or worship.

There are times when it is not appropriate to honor or “worship” someone. God says that it is wrong to bow down before (shachah; worship) other gods (Ex. 23:24). That makes perfect sense. How could a person with any sincerity honor both God and demons? A different case involved Peter, who recognized that it was not appropriate for Cornelius to bow down to (proskuneo; worship) him, even though Cornelius respected Peter. Peter felt he was not superior to Cornelius, and accepting the worship would have sent the wrong message to Cornelius, so he stopped him (Acts 10:25 and 26). Similarly, the angel stopped John from “worshipping” him. John felt the angel was superior and started to “worship” him. The angel had to correct him and remind him that the angel was only a “fellow servant” (Rev. 22:8 and 9).

In the following verse we find an account of the prophet Nathan coming in to see King David.

1 Kings 1:23 (NIV)
And they told the king, “Nathan the prophet is here.” So he went before the king and bowed [shachah] with his face to the ground.

Nathan was a prophet of God and yet he had no problem with “worshipping” King David, i.e., bowing down before him. It is perfectly appropriate to bow down to (worship) a king. However, it would have been improper for Nathan to bow down to David and then to someone in David’s court that he knew was plotting against David. “Worship” is not a hollow act. True worship comes from the heart. That is why Mordecai would not bow down before Haman, because Haman was an enemy of the Jews (Esther 3:2; 9:10). However when Jesus met the women who had come to his tomb, they “worshipped” him and were correct in doing so because he was their king, and they honored and respected him.

The act of placing oneself facedown at the feet of the king showed respect and honor. 2 Samuel 14:22 provides a good example.

2 Samuel 14:22 (NIV)
Joab fell with his face to the ground to pay him honor [shachah], and he blessed the king. Joab said, “Today your servant knows that he has found favor in your eyes, my lord the king, because the king has granted his servant’s request.”

In this verse the NIV translators chose to translate the Hebrew word shachah (bowing down or worshipping) with the phrase “to pay him honor” to reflect the nature of Joab’s actions. Although the phrase “to pay him honor” shows the purpose of Joab’s action, since the Hebrew word shachah is not translated “worship,” the English reader never sees that Joab “worshipped” David. No doubt, had Joab fallen on his face before God, the English translations would have said that Joab “worshipped” God.
1 Samuel 24 contains a record of David “worshipping” Saul.

1 Samuel 24:8 (NIV)
Then David went out of the cave and called out to Saul, “My lord the king!” When Saul looked behind him, David bowed down [shachah] and prostrated himself with his face to the ground.

Saul had been pursuing David in order to kill him. David and his men had been avoiding Saul. One time Saul went into a cave to use the bathroom, not realizing that David and his men were also in the cave. David’s men urged him to kill Saul, but instead he simply cut off a piece of Saul’s clothing. After Saul left the cave, David came out and bowed before Saul and showed him the piece of clothing to demonstrate that he would never hurt Saul. David bowed before Saul as part of his effort to convince Saul that he still honored Saul and that he was not trying to usurp Saul’s throne.

Bowing to the king, worshipping him, was a way of demonstrating respect to the king, which, of course, meant that the person had an intent to obey the king. Obedience, then, is an integral part of the worship of God or a king. The outward show of bowing is not really true worship if there is no intent in the heart to obey. If a person comes before a king and bows before him but has no intention of obeying him, then the bow is hollow and deceitful. We see this in action with Adonijah. He bowed before King Solomon but he was still scheming against him.

1 Kings 1:53 (NIV)
Then King Solomon sent men, and they brought him down from the altar. And Adonijah came and bowed [shachah] down to King Solomon, and Solomon said, “Go to your home.”

Adonijah was a half-brother of Solomon and had plotted to usurp David’s throne. But Solomon sent word that if Adonijah would do what was right, then Adonijah’s life would be spared. So Adonijah came and worshipped, bowed down to, Solomon the king as an act of honor and respect, implying that he would be obedient. Actually, Adonijah’s gesture was insincere, and he ended up being put to death (1 Kings 2:25). Bowing insincerely would be similar to calling Jesus “Lord” but then not doing what he said to do (Matt. 7:21-23). It should be that the act of worship comes from a heart of worship.

As we have seen, because the English word “worship” is often only used in Scripture of God and Jesus, it is often believed that only they can be “worshipped,” or even that Jesus must be God. This short study should have made it clear that anyone deserving of honor and respect can be “worshipped.” In the biblical culture, the “worship” was evidenced by bowing. However, in our Western society today it is not our custom to bow down to authority figures. Nevertheless, we do honor them, respect them, and in some cases should obey them. If we today honor a notable person by addressing him as “Sir,” singing “For He’s a Jolly Good Fellow” and giving him presents, we do not call that “worship,” but in fact those acts are one way we in Western society would “worship” someone. Another example would be the "cult of personalities" so prevelant in such celebrity worship as American Idol, actors & actresses, popular music singers, et cetera.

In modern Western society we “worship” our authority figures differently than biblical people worshipped their authority figures, but the essence of honoring and respecting is the same. We need to understand how the biblical custom of bowing down before someone as an act of worship can be brought into our modern world. If we see that in the biblical culture the act of bowing was the outward form produced by an inward heart of respect and honor, then we are in a position to ask, “How would we today show someone that we respect and honor him?”

Here are a few ideas to consider:

If we honor and respect a friend, then our actions show that by us focusing on him and not just only on ourselves. Similarly, we show our respect and honor for God and Jesus by giving them our focus, our time and attention. This is especially important when participating in a spiritual or religious function. For example, a person in an ecclesial function should be focused on them instead of allowing his mind to wander to the trials and troubles of life that occupy the rest of the day.

If we honor and respect a friend, then we spend time with him, especially doing things that he wants to do. Similarly, we show our respect to God by doing things He wants us to. We should take an inventory of our lives and see what we spend our time doing. Is it something that brings glory to the Lord or is it something that is just fun? For instance, do we spend more time watching TV than doing something that would serve God or the Lord? By simply taking an inventory of our time we can easily identify what is most important to us. If we find that we are not giving enough time to God, then we should make the commitment to change.

Biblically, if we “worshipped” the king, we would make an effort to obey him. Jesus said “If you love me you will keep my commandments.” Often, because we live in an age of grace, we Christ(adeph)ians forget that we have commandments. In fact there are many of them that we need to obey. For example, love your brother (1 John 4:21); pray continually (1 Thess. 5:17); do not lie (Col. 3:9); do not steal (Eph. 4:28). If we say we worship God and Jesus then we should obey them.

These suggestions are by no means comprehensive. Every Christ(adelph)ian who wants to worship God and the Lord Jesus must find a way in which he can outwardly demonstrate the respect and honor he has in his heart.
__________________

in blessing, bless
May something here prove useful
____________________________
I am a Christadelphian click here to see my statement of faith
____________________________
Isolated Christadelphians welcome at webecclesia

#12 Simpleton

Simpleton

    Rho

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,189 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 03:03 PM

Here is a verse with similar construction to Re. 22:3.

Blessed and holy is he who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and they shall reign with him a thousand years (Re. 20:6).

Who is "him" in that verse?

#13 Jeremy

Jeremy

    Order of the Golden Pedant

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,434 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 03:48 PM

Here is a verse with similar construction to Re. 22:3.

Blessed and holy is he who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and they shall reign with him a thousand years (Re. 20:6).

Who is "him" in that verse?

Christ. God is already reigning.
And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.

#14 Simpleton

Simpleton

    Rho

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,189 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 04:57 PM

Here is a verse with similar construction to Re. 22:3.

Blessed and holy is he who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and they shall reign with him a thousand years (Re. 20:6).

Who is "him" in that verse?

Christ. God is already reigning.

And they are priest of?

#15 Jeremy

Jeremy

    Order of the Golden Pedant

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,434 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 05:07 PM

And they are priest of?

Both, as the verse says.

If it was talking about God and Christ reigning, it would say "them" not "him".
And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.

#16 Simpleton

Simpleton

    Rho

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,189 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 05:22 PM

And they are priest of?

Both, as the verse says.

If it was talking about God and Christ reigning, it would say "them" not "him".

There are 2 reigning? Right?

#17 Guido

Guido

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,335 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 05:34 PM


And they are priest of?

Both, as the verse says.

If it was talking about God and Christ reigning, it would say "them" not "him".

There are 2 reigning? Right?

There are many reigning to gether with Christ; and all are reigning on God's behalf. The saints do not reign WITH God. They reign with Christ on God's behalf. At the end of the reign of Christ and the saints the kingdom is given to the Father.

#18 Jeremy

Jeremy

    Order of the Golden Pedant

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,434 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 05:47 PM


Both, as the verse says.

If it was talking about God and Christ reigning, it would say "them" not "him".

There are 2 reigning? Right?

In a sense there will be two reigning: as Guido has explained, Christ reigns on God's behalf rather than in his own name. But as far as this passage is concerned, see my earlier answer: if it meant two reigning, it would say "them", not "him". Easy.
And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.

#19 Simpleton

Simpleton

    Rho

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,189 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 06:09 PM

OK.

Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever." (Re. 11:15)

The "he" that shall reign for ever and ever is Christ; right?

#20 Melchior

Melchior

    Delta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 41 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 06:25 PM

OK.

Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever." (Re. 11:15)

The "he" that shall reign for ever and ever is Christ; right?



Stay focused.

This thread discusses whether the Greek word latreuo is ever used to describe the worship rendered Jesus. Do you have such a verse or not?

Edited by Melchior, 14 December 2006 - 06:25 PM.


#21 Guido

Guido

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,335 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 06:34 PM

OK.

Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever." (Re. 11:15)

The "he" that shall reign for ever and ever is Christ; right?

No, it is speaking of the Lord God Almighty as the rest of the verse says. Christ reigns on behalf of the Lord God Almighty UNTIL the job is complete. Whatever ambiguity there might be in Revelation is clearly explained in 1 Cor 15...

24Then the end will come, when he [i.e. Christ] hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power.
25For he [i.e. Christ] must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
26The last enemy to be destroyed is death.
27For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.
28When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.



Notice the clear distinction between God the Father to whom the kindom belongs and Christ who reigns on God's behalf.

Edited by Guido, 14 December 2006 - 06:37 PM.


#22 Simpleton

Simpleton

    Rho

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,189 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 06:34 PM


OK.

Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever." (Re. 11:15)

The "he" that shall reign for ever and ever is Christ; right?



Stay focused.

This thread discusses whether the Greek word latreuo is ever used to describe the worship rendered Jesus. Do you have such a verse or not?

Patience Melchior. I have already submitted my verse (Re. 22:3) and am now defending it.

#23 Mercia2

Mercia2

    Chi

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,442 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 06:40 PM

No it is not; it is specifically applied to one single person; hence the use of the words "he" and "his". Trinitarians do not believe that God is merely one single person, so they cannot argue that this reference is to God as a Trinity.

That is the key point, if the trinity is spoken of as three persons it totally misses the point. Here in the Revelation it is both who are upon the throne, but there is only two in title.

The key is in understanding Revelation 2 where Jesus speaks of those who knock and ask for the Holy Spirit (see also Luke 11:13) "I and the Father will come and sup with you" - this is the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is God and Jesus, it is God, "God is Spirit". This is what we need to now understand but I am afraid that would mean Christadelphians accepting the reality of a supernatural Holy Spirit and asking for it according to Luke 11:13 after repenting of sins and becoming truly born again.

Edited by Mercia2, 14 December 2006 - 06:42 PM.

"and will smite every HORSE OF THE PEOPLE with blindness"

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_symbolic_meaning_of_a_horse#ixzz1K0LLUt00

#24 Mercia2

Mercia2

    Chi

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,442 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 06:44 PM

God is Spirit, Jesus "became a life giving Spirit", the Holy Spirit is life giving (Romans 8), the Holy Spirit could not come until Jesus had died.

Please turn to Jesus with all your heart and mind and stop thinking naturally.
"and will smite every HORSE OF THE PEOPLE with blindness"

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_symbolic_meaning_of_a_horse#ixzz1K0LLUt00

#25 Simpleton

Simpleton

    Rho

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,189 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 06:56 PM


OK.

Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever." (Re. 11:15)

The "he" that shall reign for ever and ever is Christ; right?

No, it is speaking of the Lord God Almighty as the rest of the verse says. Christ reigns on behalf of the Lord God Almighty UNTIL the job is complete. Whatever ambiguity there might be in Revelation is clearly explained in 1 Cor 15...

24Then the end will come, when he [i.e. Christ] hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power.
25For he [i.e. Christ] must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
26The last enemy to be destroyed is death.
27For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.
28When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.



Notice the clear distinction between God the Father to whom the kindom belongs and Christ who reigns on God's behalf.

It would seem that the kingdom is a shared kingdom. The Lord surrenders the kingdom up to God the Father at the end of the millennial reign after all enemies have been defeated but at no time does Christ cease to reign. The throne is shared with the Father and this has always been the case (Jn. 6:62).

What do you think?

#26 Guido

Guido

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,335 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 07:25 PM

It would seem that the kingdom is a shared kingdom. The Lord surrenders the kingdom up to God the Father at the end of the millennial reign after all enemies have been defeated but at no time does Christ cease to reign. The throne is shared with the Father and this has always been the case (Jn. 6:62).

What do you think?

After all enemies are defeated, then there will be no one over whom Christ will need to reign. All that will be left is Christ and those who reign with him. (Perhaps you're thinking of animals and vegitation and that sort of thing). As for the 1000 years, I agree that it is shared kingdom between God, Christ, and the saints. Christ will be sitting on the throne of his Father and the saints will be reigning with Christ and all will be giving latreuo to God the Father. So that takes us back to the original question; the Father is the one who receives latreuo, Christ is the one with whom the saints will reign.

Edited by Guido, 14 December 2006 - 07:25 PM.


#27 Jeremy

Jeremy

    Order of the Golden Pedant

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,434 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 07:46 PM

It would seem that the kingdom is a shared kingdom. The Lord surrenders the kingdom up to God the Father at the end of the millennial reign after all enemies have been defeated but at no time does Christ cease to reign.

All of which is pretty watertight proof that God and Christ are separate beings, I would have thought.

This...

The throne is shared with the Father and this has always been the case (Jn. 6:62).

...is patently not the case, as a glance at Rev. 3 v 21 demonstrates (Jesus speaking): "He that overcometh, I will give to him to sit down with me in my throne, as I also overcame, and sat down with my Father in his throne." In other words, there was a specific point at which Jesus took his place on the throne, a place which did not previously occupy.

Like I said, easy.
And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.

#28 Simpleton

Simpleton

    Rho

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,189 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 07:52 PM

After all enemies are defeated, then there will be no one over whom Christ will need to reign. All that will be left is Christ and those who reign with him. (Perhaps you're thinking of animals and vegitation and that sort of thing). As for the 1000 years, I agree that it is shared kingdom between God, Christ, and the saints. Christ will be sitting on the throne of his Father and the saints will be reigning with Christ and all will be giving latreuo to God the Father. So that takes us back to the original question; the Father is the one who receives latreuo, Christ is the one with whom the saints will reign.

The God to which the saints render latreuo has his name on their foreheads (Re. 22:4). This is the name of the Father and the name of the Son.

They shall see his face, and his name shall be on their foreheads (Re. 22:4).

Then I looked, and lo, on Mount Zion stood the Lamb, and with him a hundred and forty four thousand who had his name and his Father's name written on their foreheads (Re. 14:1).

#29 Guido

Guido

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,335 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 08:44 PM

The God to which the saints render latreuo has his name on their foreheads (Re. 22:4). This is the name of the Father and the name of the Son.

They shall see his face, and his name shall be on their foreheads (Re. 22:4).

Then I looked, and lo, on Mount Zion stood the Lamb, and with him a hundred and forty four thousand who had his name and his Father's name written on their foreheads (Re. 14:1).

So, the saints have the name of the Father and the name of the son on their foreheads--true. But John doesn't say they render latreuo to both of them; it says they render latreuo to HIM. They have the name of the Father on their foreheads and they render latreuo to the Father. They also have the name of the Son on their foreheads, but they don't render latreuo to the Son. John does not say they render latreuo to them--he says they render latreuo to him.

There are TWO individuals in Rev 22:4--God and the Lamb--but latreuo is only rendered to one of those. It is obvious from the verses that follow that the 'him' referred to is the Lord God, not the lamb.

It's as Jeremy said--easy.

Edited by Guido, 14 December 2006 - 08:49 PM.


#30 Simpleton

Simpleton

    Rho

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,189 posts

Posted 14 December 2006 - 09:17 PM

So, the saints have the name of the Father and the name of the son on their foreheads--true. But John doesn't say they render latreuo to both of them; it says they render latreuo to HIM. They have the name of the Father on their foreheads and they render latreuo to the Father. They also have the name of the Son on their foreheads, but they don't render latreuo to the Son. John does not say they render latreuo to them--he says they render latreuo to him.

There are TWO individuals in Rev 22:4--God and the Lamb--but latreuo is only rendered to one of those. It is obvious from the verses that follow that the 'him' referred to is the Lord God, not the lamb.

It's as Jeremy said--easy.

Are you able to admit that the Father and the Son are identified by the same name? They do not share the personal identities of Father and Son but they do share divine nature and it's perfections, the throne, the kingdom, the priests, etc. Or is there 2 names on the foreheads of the saints?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users