20 replies to this topic

[Abishua]

(John 12:36-41)

36 "While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light. These things spake Jesus, and departed, and did hide himself from them.
37 But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:
38 That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
41 These things said Esaias, when he saw "his" glory, and spake of him.

I believe that Esaias (Isaiah) was referring to Yahweh in verse 41, but I have met an antagonist who insists that the pronoun "his" in verse 41 HAS to reference a noun (before or after) per greek grammatical rules, and in his opinion that would leave only Jesus as an option (back in verse 36).

Is there such a rule?
How can I refute this?

Edited by Abishua, 10 July 2009 - 03:11 AM.

[Evangelion]

You are correct; the "He" refers to Yahweh, not Jesus. I've checked various commentaries and none of them insist that the reference must be to Christ on grammatical grounds. The argument that Christ is the referent can only be made on theological grounds; grammar has nothing to do with the case.

BTW, the verse is correctly translated "...because he saw his glory, and spoke of him" - not "...when he saw his glory, and spoke of him".

[Mark Taunton]

Evangelion, on Jul 10 2009, 07:09 AM, said:

You are correct; the "He" refers to Yahweh, not Jesus. I've checked various commentaries and none of them insist that the reference must be to Christ on grammatical grounds. The argument that Christ is the referent can only be made on theological grounds; grammar has nothing to do with the case.

Sorry to disagree, but I find no problem at all about Isaiah seeing the glory of Christ in a prophetic vision. I believe this happened particularly as recorded in Isaiah 6, where Isaiah saw his lord ("adoni" = "my lord", as Isaiah records it), sitting on a throne, high and lifted up. But that by no means proves or even supports the false trinitarian view that Jesus just is Yahweh. He is not; he is a (indeed the supreme) manifestation of Yahweh, but he is not Yahweh himself.

We can all agree that Jesus now, following his resurrection and ascension, is high and lifted up, sitting in glory in the throne of his father in heaven. That is what Isaiah saw. The glory of Isaiah's lord is the glory of Yahweh his father, which was given to him. The glory of God was given to Jesus because he glorified God (John 17:4,5), especially in his obedience and willingness to lay down his soul to death, to redeem sinners. God promised to glorify his own name, as Jesus desired, because of Jesus' obedience even in his hour of trial (John 12:27-28). Because of Jesus' obedience and his willing giving of himself in sacrifice, God has made him both "lord" and "christ" (Acts 2:36). That helps to explain why Isaiah uses the word "lord" in Isa 6:1. And John particularly records how the disciples themselves saw Jesus' glory, that is, the glory not of the father himself alone, but of the only-begotten of the father, the word made flesh (John 1:14).

In John 12 there are multiple elements in context that link together Isaiah 6 and 53. Jesus is described as being "lifted up" (Isa 6:1); this speaks not only of his exaltation to the throne of God in heaven as seen in Isa 6, but also of the nature of his death, being hung upon the tree (John 3:14, 12:32,33) that Isa 53 predicts. John's record in chapter 12 is showing us that Isaiah's inspired description of Christ in his suffering is intimately bound up with the vision he was given of Christ in his glory.

Quote

BTW, the verse is correctly translated "...because he saw his glory, and spoke of him" - not "...when he saw his glory, and spoke of him".

Again, sorry to disagree, but that's not justified at all. The Greek word 'ote' is translated almost everywhere else in the NT as "when". To say that in this one place it means "because" and not "when", is without grounds, and in any case doesn't do anything to argue against the false trinitarian view. That word in this context refers to the time that Isaiah was given relevation concerning Christ; "when" is the only reasonable translation of it here.

[Richie]

Abishua and Evangelion are incorrect. It does refer to Jesus although this needs some qualification. In Isaiah 6 we see the Lord "high and lifted up", phraseology used by Isaiah in the first 5 chapters to refer to those who were proud and arrogant in Judah. In contrast to that he uses the phrase twice more later in the book, once to refer to God (Isaiah 57) and once to refer prophetically to Christ (Isaiah 52). So we are still left with the question - who is the Lord of Isaiah 6? To begin with it's God who is enthroned, but throughout the OT God bestows his glory of others to sit on his throne. The classic example is Solomon but we also read about a priest on his throne in Zechariah 6. That's what we have in Isaiah 6 - a priest (the "train" (KJV) a reference to the priestly garment) on the throne. So Isaiah 6 is looking forward to Christ.

The context in John 12 is obvious is that it's talking about Christ. That's what Isaiah saw - a vision of the future glory of the Lord Jesus Christ.

[Abishua]

Thank you.

You'all have given me plenty to chew on.

Blessings to you.

Edited by Abishua, 10 July 2009 - 02:06 PM.

[Lectron]

Abishua, on Jul 10 2009, 04:06 AM, said:

(John 12:36-41)

36 "While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light. These things spake Jesus, and departed, and did hide himself from them.
37 But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:
38 That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
41 These things said Esaias, when he saw "his" glory, and spake of him.

I believe that Esaias (Isaiah) was referring to Yahweh in verse 41, but I have met an antagonist who insists that the pronoun "his" in verse 41 HAS to reference a noun (before or after) per greek grammatical rules, and in his opinion that would leave only Jesus as an option (back in verse 36).

Is there such a rule?
How can I refute this?

The thrust of this passage is a stubborn refusal to see God when revealed by a prophet and is saying that the Nation's refusal to percieve Jesus and his message is as ineffectual as that of Isaiah's own ministry yet the passage referred to says:
Behold, my servant shall prosper, he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high. Isa 52:13

They had failed to see that the prosperity, exaltation and highness of Jesus was in fact the extremity of his own service, suffering and degradation and death undertaken by God's chosen servant to bring lasting atonement to many.

Isaiah ends by saying:
Therefore I will divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he poured out his soul to death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

[Abishua]

I should add....My trinitarian antagonist believes that this passage from John proves that Jesus is Yahweh.

[Richie]

Well in that case you could take them to all the passages in the OT where it says God bestows his majesty on others, e.g. Solomon. Solomon is a good example because he is also called the son of God. I can give you a list of passages if you want.

[Evangelion]

Richie, I refer you to this post as well, since it also covers your argument.

Mark Taunton, on Jul 10 2009, 09:56 AM, said:

Sorry to disagree, but I find no problem at all about Isaiah seeing the glory of Christ in a prophetic vision.

Not even when he receives glory, worship and honour that is exclusively due to God alone? Nowhere in the Bible do we ever find Jesus being worshipped (not even in Revelation!) unless it is in this verse. That's not good enough for me. The figure on the throne is also referred to as Yahweh Sabaoth. Nowhere in the Bible does Jesus ever receive this title; it is exclusive to God.

Quote

I believe this happened particularly as recorded in Isaiah 6, where Isaiah saw his lord ("adoni" = "my lord", as Isaiah records it), sitting on a throne, high and lifted up. But that by no means proves or even supports the false trinitarian view that Jesus just is Yahweh. He is not; he is a (indeed the supreme) manifestation of Yahweh, but he is not Yahweh himself.

Actually no, Isaiah does not use the word adoni; he uses the word adonai. This is highly significant, because as you can see from the article here, adonai is never used in reference to anyone but God, nor is adoni ever used in reference to God Himself. The overwhelming evidence of Scriptural consistency militates against your interpretation.

Quote

We can all agree that Jesus now, following his resurrection and ascension, is high and lifted up, sitting in glory in the throne of his father in heaven. That is what Isaiah saw. The glory of Isaiah's lord is the glory of Yahweh his father, which was given to him. The glory of God was given to Jesus because he glorified God (John 17:4,5), especially in his obedience and willingness to lay down his soul to death, to redeem sinners. God promised to glorify his own name, as Jesus desired, because of Jesus' obedience even in his hour of trial (John 12:27-28). Because of Jesus' obedience and his willing giving of himself in sacrifice, God has made him both "lord" and "christ" (Acts 2:36). That helps to explain why Isaiah uses the word "lord" in Isa 6:1. And John particularly records how the disciples themselves saw Jesus' glory, that is, the glory not of the father himself alone, but of the only-begotten of the father, the word made flesh (John 1:14).

In John 12 there are multiple elements in context that link together Isaiah 6 and 53. Jesus is described as being "lifted up" (Isa 6:1); this speaks not only of his exaltation to the throne of God in heaven as seen in Isa 6, but also of the nature of his death, being hung upon the tree (John 3:14, 12:32,33) that Isa 53 predicts. John's record in chapter 12 is showing us that Isaiah's inspired description of Christ in his suffering is intimately bound up with the vision he was given of Christ in his glory.

I'm afraid that this is merely association of terms; it is not proof that Jesus is the adonai worshipped in Isaiah 6.

Quote

Quote

BTW, the verse is correctly translated "...because he saw his glory, and spoke of him" - not "...when he saw his glory, and spoke of him".

Again, sorry to disagree, but that's not justified at all. The Greek word 'ote' is translated almost everywhere else in the NT as "when". To say that in this one place it means "because" and not "when", is without grounds, and in any case doesn't do anything to argue against the false trinitarian view. That word in this context refers to the time that Isaiah was given relevation concerning Christ; "when" is the only reasonable translation of it here.

Of course it doesn't do anything to argue against the Trinitarian view, but that's no reason for rejecting it. Many modern translations have "because" instead of "when"; even the ESV does this. There is no problem with either translation; I simply think that "because" makes better sense.

What makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever, is a vision of Jesus receiving worship due only to God, addressed by divine titles exclusive to God, and making a prophetic statement which will later be quoted by the apostle John - all before his actual existence!

[Lectron]

Evangelion, on Jul 10 2009, 09:17 PM, said:

.

What makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever, is a vision of Jesus receiving worship due only to God, addressed by divine titles exclusive to God, and making a prophetic statement which will later be quoted by the apostle John - all before his actual existence!

A lot of bible margins refer Isa 6 but John was (IMO)referring to the Glory of God's servant in Isa 52:13 whether you take that glory or exaltation post ressurrection or the exaltation of his actual atoning mission. I think the latter, for this surely is the argument of John. It was the blindness of the Jews in recognising Jesus as the servant that is the issue in this passage.

[Richie]

You're still wrong Ev, but I don't have time to go through it right now. The whole vision of Isaiah 6 is meaningless if it's not a vision of Christ. I'll get my notes together at some point - have 6 classes on it.

[Mark Taunton]

Evangelion, on Jul 10 2009, 09:17 PM, said:

Mark Taunton, on Jul 10 2009, 09:56 AM, said:

Sorry to disagree, but I find no problem at all about Isaiah seeing the glory of Christ in a prophetic vision.

Not even when he receives glory, worship and honour that is exclusively due to God alone? Nowhere in the Bible do we ever find Jesus being worshipped (not even in Revelation!) unless it is in this verse. That's not good enough for me. The figure on the throne is also referred to as Yahweh Sabaoth. Nowhere in the Bible does Jesus ever receive this title; it is exclusive to God.

Where is "worship" in Isa 6:1? I see none! And in the later verses it says nothing of the "lord" as actually being "Yahweh Sabaoth". The word "lord" comes only in v1 and v8, as a subject, not identified and equated with any other specific terms. Also, v2 speaks of the seraphim being "above him". I know of no scripture elsewhere in which anyone or anything is described as being above Yahweh himself. Yahweh is always above everything and everyone else. That seems a significant pointer to this "lord" not being Yahweh himself.

As to "worship" in relation to Jesus: Jesus certainly was worshipped, legitimately, both in his mortal life (e.g. Mt 2:11,8:2,9:18,14:33,15:25) and after he was raised from the dead and glorified (e.g. Mt. 28:9,17). That will certainly happen again in the kingdom. It will apply not only to Jesus, but to the saints also (e.g. Rev 3:9). That does not imply that Jesus, or any saint, is Yahweh himself; rather, Jesus fully manifests Yahweh's name (John 17:6), and is worthy of praise and reverence because of the glory, mercy and truth of God which was revealed to men in him, in his righteousness.

Quote

Quote

We can all agree that Jesus now, following his resurrection and ascension, is high and lifted up, sitting in glory in the throne of his father in heaven. That is what Isaiah saw. The glory of Isaiah's lord is the glory of Yahweh his father, which was given to him. The glory of God was given to Jesus because he glorified God (John 17:4,5), especially in his obedience and willingness to lay down his soul to death, to redeem sinners. God promised to glorify his own name, as Jesus desired, because of Jesus' obedience even in his hour of trial (John 12:27-28). Because of Jesus' obedience and his willing giving of himself in sacrifice, God has made him both "lord" and "christ" (Acts 2:36). That helps to explain why Isaiah uses the word "lord" in Isa 6:1. And John particularly records how the disciples themselves saw Jesus' glory, that is, the glory not of the father himself alone, but of the only-begotten of the father, the word made flesh (John 1:14).

In John 12 there are multiple elements in context that link together Isaiah 6 and 53. Jesus is described as being "lifted up" (Isa 6:1); this speaks not only of his exaltation to the throne of God in heaven as seen in Isa 6, but also of the nature of his death, being hung upon the tree (John 3:14, 12:32,33) that Isa 53 predicts. John's record in chapter 12 is showing us that Isaiah's inspired description of Christ in his suffering is intimately bound up with the vision he was given of Christ in his glory.

I'm afraid that this is merely association of terms; it is not proof that Jesus is the adonai worshipped in Isaiah 6.

(a) Where is any mention of "worship", in Isa 6:1? (b) Please consider again the details I indicated; "association of terms" in scripture is rarely, if ever, an empty thing, with no import.

Quote

Quote

Quote

BTW, the verse is correctly translated "...because he saw his glory, and spoke of him" - not "...when he saw his glory, and spoke of him".

Again, sorry to disagree, but that's not justified at all. The Greek word 'ote' is translated almost everywhere else in the NT as "when". To say that in this one place it means "because" and not "when", is without grounds, and in any case doesn't do anything to argue against the false trinitarian view. That word in this context refers to the time that Isaiah was given relevation concerning Christ; "when" is the only reasonable translation of it here.

Of course it doesn't do anything to argue against the Trinitarian view, but that's no reason for rejecting it. Many modern translations have "because" instead of "when"; even the ESV does this. There is no problem with either translation; I simply think that "because" makes better sense.

But you said "because" is correct and "when" is not. That's why I disagreed. Now you're saying "when" is not a problem, so that's better. Even so, I believe "when" is the only justifiable translation. There are ways of saying "because" in Greek (not including this word 'ote'), and none of them occurs here.

Quote

What makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever, is a vision of Jesus receiving worship due only to God, addressed by divine titles exclusive to God, and making a prophetic statement which will later be quoted by the apostle John - all before his actual existence!

I am unable to identify what you mean for the first things there. Both Jesus and God his father will be together praised and honoured by the saints in the kingdom, as Revelation shows (e.g. 5:13, 7:10). Divine titles are also applied to Jesus (e.g. Rev 17:4, cp 1 Tim 6:15), as they were given to men in the past also (Ezr 7:12, Dan 2:37). None of that makes Jesus = Yahweh, nor indicates his pre-existence.

As to your concern over the apparent time issue. Revelation from God transcends our simple view of time and order. Biblical prophecy of course does that a lot, revealing the future before it has happened. John in Revelation saw in vision, and recorded, things that were still future, including some that have not yet happened even now. Just as Isaiah was given a vision of Christ's future glory, it does not mean that it had already happened in Isaiah's day. The 3 disciples on the mountain saw a vision of the kingdom, including the resurrected Moses and Elijah, but those two prophets were speaking with Jesus of the things he would yet go on to suffer in Jerusalem, in the time of his life in the flesh. I suggest the vision Isaiah had, recorded in chapter 6, is of that same character.

Edited by Mark Taunton, 11 July 2009 - 09:31 AM.

[Mark Taunton]

Evangelion, on Jul 10 2009, 09:17 PM, said:

Mark Taunton, on Jul 10 2009, 09:56 AM, said:

I believe this happened particularly as recorded in Isaiah 6, where Isaiah saw his lord ("adoni" = "my lord", as Isaiah records it), sitting on a throne, high and lifted up. But that by no means proves or even supports the false trinitarian view that Jesus just is Yahweh. He is not; he is a (indeed the supreme) manifestation of Yahweh, but he is not Yahweh himself.

Actually no, Isaiah does not use the word adoni; he uses the word adonai. This is highly significant, because as you can see from the article here, adonai is never used in reference to anyone but God, nor is adoni ever used in reference to God Himself. The overwhelming evidence of Scriptural consistency militates against your interpretation.

You raise a separate issue here, which would be best continued in a different thread, but I will briefly summarise my position. The words "adonai" and "adoni" are distinct only in the pointing of the Hebrew text. But there was no pointing in the original texts; it was added by the Masoretes, from around the 7th Century AD onwards. The great scroll of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran, like all pre-Masoretic texts, has no pointing. It has nothing at Isa 6:1 or 6:8, or in any other place, to distinguish 'adoni' as referring uniquely to Yahweh himself, and to no-one else. Jewish tradition makes a big thing of this claimed distinction, but that's all it is - Jewish tradition. We have no scriptural grounds to believe it is a true distinction.

(Indeed, there are specific reasons to doubt this distinction. For example, the pointing of 'adoni' as 'adonai' in Psa 110:5 seems to be a mistake, when considering the meaning of the psalm in scriptural context. The "Lord" there is, logically from the context, Christ at the right hand of God (v1), not God himself.)

Edited by Mark Taunton, 11 July 2009 - 10:20 AM.

[Mark Taunton]

Lectron, on Jul 10 2009, 10:19 PM, said:

A lot of bible margins refer Isa 6 but John was (IMO)referring to the Glory of God's servant in Isa 52:13 whether you take that glory or exaltation post ressurrection or the exaltation of his actual atoning mission. I think the latter, for this surely is the argument of John. It was the blindness of the Jews in recognising Jesus as the servant that is the issue in this passage.

What forces us to select only one option? Why can it not be both?

The glory of God was revealed in Jesus' ministry primarily in the spiritual sense, not outwardly. That visible glory of brightness was seen briefly in his transfiguration, and later by Saul on the road to Damascus. But the spiritual glory of Jesus was the glory of God, as revealed in his name Yahweh (Exo 33:17-18,34:6-7), the name that Jesus manifested to the disciples (John 17:6). Jesus' glory is described in terms of grace and mercy, as Moses was shown by God. That is the primary sense of glory referred to in John 1:14-18.

But it is precisely because Jesus truly showed that character and glory of the father in his love towards us, worked out in the giving of God's only-begotten son, that God has exalted him, and has raised him to his own right hand in the throne of glory on high. We cannot separate the one type of glory from the other; no more can we force a distinction onto John 12:41, as if only one of the passages (ch 6, ch 52-3) in Isaiah is relevant, and the other is not. Both are.

[Abishua]

Richie, on Jul 10 2009, 02:49 PM, said:

Well in that case you could take them to all the passages in the OT where it says God bestows his majesty on others, e.g. Solomon. Solomon is a good example because he is also called the son of God. I can give you a list of passages if you want.

That would be appreciated! Thank you.

[Mark Taunton]

steveyb3, on Jul 11 2009, 03:10 PM, said:

Mark, concerning the worship of Jesus, wouldn't that be blasphemy? Does not the word translated as "worship" mean homage that is due towards say a King or someone of authority? I don't think they were worshipping the baby Jesus for instance.

I think you've answered your own question. Scriptural usage of this Greek word for "worship" ('proskuneo', G4352) shows that the object of worship is not restricted to the one true God himself alone, as we might suppose, but includes on occasion angels and men of God, and specifically Jesus the son of God. It is the word that is used of the wise men's honouring of the infant Jesus (Mt 2:2,11). In the relevant circumstance, and with the correct understanding of all involved, this is not blasphemy.

Although Yahweh alone is the most high God (Hebrew 'el', Gen 14:18-22), it was evidently appropriate at certain times to worship before lesser "gods" (Hebrew 'elohim', Greek 'theoi': see Jesus' words in John 10:34-36, referring to Psalm 82) who are identified by God as worthy, and in whose presence others prostrate themselves in acknowledgement of that.

There are a good number of cases to be found in the OT; the equivalent OT word for worship is 'shachah', H7812. Examples include:
- the angels who visited Abraham and saved Lot (Gen 18:12, 19:1), who bore God's name Yahweh.
- Joseph: Gen 42:6,43:26,28; 47:31,48:12 - all in (partial) fulfilment of Gen 37:9,10.
- Judah: Gen 49:8.
- Jethro: Ex 18:7.
- Moses, firstly acknowledged by the servants of Pharaoh (Exo 11:8), and later by the men of Israel as he entered into the cloud and the presence of God (Exo 33:7-11).
- the angel of Yahweh who opposed Balaam: Num 22:31.
- the captain of Yahweh's host (Jos 5:14).
- Boaz: Ruth 2:10.
- David: 1 Sam 25:23, 2 Sam 9:6,8.
- David's servants: 1 Sam 25:41.

I hope this helps...

[Lectron]

Mark Taunton, on Jul 11 2009, 02:51 PM, said:

Lectron, on Jul 10 2009, 10:19 PM, said:

A lot of bible margins refer Isa 6 but John was (IMO)referring to the Glory of God's servant in Isa 52:13 whether you take that glory or exaltation post ressurrection or the exaltation of his actual atoning mission. I think the latter, for this surely is the argument of John. It was the blindness of the Jews in recognising Jesus as the servant that is the issue in this passage.

What forces us to select only one option? Why can it not be both?

See below

Quote

The glory of God was revealed in Jesus' ministry primarily in the spiritual sense, not outwardly. That visible glory of brightness was seen briefly in his transfiguration, and later by Saul on the road to Damascus. But the spiritual glory of Jesus was the glory of God, as revealed in his name Yahweh (Exo 33:17-18,34:6-7), the name that Jesus manifested to the disciples (John 17:6). Jesus' glory is described in terms of grace and mercy, as Moses was shown by God. That is the primary sense of glory referred to in John 1:14-18.

Agreed absolutely

Quote

But it is precisely because Jesus truly showed that character and glory of the father in his love towards us, worked out in the giving of God's only-begotten son, that God has exalted him, and has raised him to his own right hand in the throne of glory on high. We cannot separate the one type of glory from the other; no more can we force a distinction onto John 12:41, as if only one of the passages (ch 6, ch 52-3) in Isaiah is relevant, and the other is not. Both are.

I disagree, because, the context of chapter 6 shows the true King of Israel (God Almighty) who had been rejected of men when Israel clamoured for a Human king with the shortcomings of human kings. They didn't reject Christ, he hadn't yet appeared, they rejected the theocracy of Almighty God for a human figurehead. Such a king was Uzziah whose sins were as scarlet and had died in the whiteness of leprosy doing anything but manifesting the true God. The vision was a reminder to Isaiah and his readers that the true king was Yahweh all along and his glory would be reserved for a more dutiful servant than the self-willed Azariah(Uzziah)(2 Chron 26:16-26) or even his heir Jotham.

[Richie]

Abishua, on Jul 11 2009, 08:08 AM, said:

Richie, on Jul 10 2009, 02:49 PM, said:

Well in that case you could take them to all the passages in the OT where it says God bestows his majesty on others, e.g. Solomon. Solomon is a good example because he is also called the son of God. I can give you a list of passages if you want.

That would be appreciated! Thank you.

Here are my notes from the relevant talk:

The Lord on the Throne

SLIDE #1 - title

Opening
Yesterday we saw the example of Uzziah, a king who became full of pride. He thought he had gained his status as an exalted ruler by virtue of his own strength. He learned the hard way that it was God who strengthened him (Uzziah) and it was God who helped him (Azariah). Today we shall begin to consider the Lord upon the throne and see him there, high and lifted up, in his exalted status. First of all though, let’s think a little bit more about the lesson of Uzziah.

SLIDE #2 – meaning of Uzz

As we’ve seen his name describes how God strengthened him, and in fact the word “uzz”, the first part of his name, is used fairly often in Scripture. Here are just a few examples:

SLIDE #3 – Uzz in Scripture

It’s a very interesting exercise to go through the verses that use this word – you’ll see the lessons that we are learning from Isaiah 6 come up over and over again.

Have a look at Isaiah 12 – culmination of Isaiah’s introduction, speaks of the solution

Isaiah 12:2 – what we will see is that the one on the throne does not trust in his own strength

So who is the one upon the throne?

Isaiah 6:1 - “high” + “lifted up”

Firstly these two words used by Isaiah in introduction to sin of Judah

Isaiah 2:12-14 – 3 times phrase repeated about pride of Judah, exemplified in Uzziah

So is the one on the throne Jesus or God?

Isaiah 52:13 – Jesus
Isaiah 57:15 – Yahweh
Isaiah 52:1 – one of the occurrence of “uzz” – need to put on strength!

Isaiah speaks of God’s majesty previously:

Isaiah 2:17, 19, 21 – God to terrify earth with his awesome majesty as mighty king
Isaiah 3:8 – people defied God’s majesty
Isaiah 5:15-16 – contrast

Psalm 47:1-9 – God – to him belongs all glory, dominion and power
So how can the one on the throne be Jesus?

1 Chronicles 29:10-13 – all glory belongs to God, but…
1 Chronicles 29:23-25 – Solomon bestowed with majesty
Psalm 21:1-5 – given glory and majesty (verse 1 – uzz)

SLIDE #4 – the one on the throne

Answer = both, God and angels then Jesus and saints (all authority given)

SLIDE #5 - both sit together

But where is the throne?

Isaiah 6:1-3 – throne in the temple

Throne in temple = ark where God dwelt between cherubim

One on throne has “train” = hem of robe, always before here of High Priest

Exo 28:2 – clothed with holy garments for glory and beauty
Exo 28:33-35 – same word “train” in Isa 6:1
Exo 28:36-38 – mitre of High Priest with holiness on forehead (Isa 6:3) – compare with Uzziah shining forth with leprosy

SLIDE #6 – a priest on the throne

Zech 6:11-13 – priest upon throne who does “bear the majesty” – invested with glory of another

Why? Because he is a representative of God on the throne.

Psalm 145 about God as King
Psalm 145:1-5 – “glorious honour of thy majesty”
Psalm 145:13 – “everlasting kingdom” – almost unique in Old Testament

2 Peter 1:11 – picked up by Peter – unique in New Testament
2 Peter 1:16-17 – Jesus given that majesty, honour and glory as God’s representative king

Matthew 16 – the Christ, the Son of God – the king, but what type of king?
Matthew 17:1 – brings them up = priestly language

SLIDE #7 & #8 – occurrences of “bring/lead”

Matthew 17:2 – "his face did shine as the sun" + garments, all white

Not with the glory of man like the sun shining but what shone forth from the face of Jesus Christ was the glory, honour, power, dominion and holiness of the Almighty God

[Lectron]

Good refs Richie.

[Richie]

You're welcome. Sorry about not taking the time to do anything but copy and paste my speaker's notes. Getting the wife and kids ready to go to Bible camp tomorrow...