That verse states that those are the words of God the Father, as does Revelation 1:1.
Notice how the author is speaking about God and Jesus as two different beings:
Two titles in parallel do not necessarily mean two separate beings. You are offering this as an objection which if successful would only create biblical contradiction... justifying your choice of one of two contradicting sides. I'm pointing out that this is not a valid objection, such as illustrated in the following passage:
Isaiah 44:6 KJV
(6)
Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
For your objection to carry true that would mean it must be true always, such as in Isaiah 44:6 above. Do you understand that passage as speaking of one being or two?
I can see why you would think that way, but it is not conclusive, not when John is shown that God and Jesus are separate beings.
| Revelation 5:6-7 6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.
7 And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne. |
Mind if we look further who it is that sits upon that throne? First, the Lamb is in the midst of that throne, and elsewhere we see that the Lamb is also included in that throne. There is only one throne (not thrones) and the Lamb owns the throne.
Revelation 7:17 KJV
(17)
For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.
Revelation 22:1 KJV
(1) And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of
the throne of God and of the Lamb.
Branching off of the thrones track, He that sits on the throne 1) lives for ever and ever and 2) created all things.
Revelation 4:9-11 KJV
(9) And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever,
(10) The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying,
(11) Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.
Colossians 1:15-16 KJV
(15)
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
(16)
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers:
all things were created by him, and for him:
John 1:3 KJV
(3)
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
John 1:10 KJV
(10)
He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
That brings us back to Jesus... is the one who sits on that throne, he is the Lord God Almighty, because he is identified as our creator. What we have here is a solid "IS" and there is never a solid "IS NOT."
I was raised to believe in the Trinity doctrine.
No wonder you got confused.
I found that looking at the scriptures through the lens of the Trinity doctrine only confuses what the scriptures say instead of clarifying them.
No disagreement there.
Yes, there is a reason Jesus uses those titles, but it is not blasphemy because that form of title and address is NOT reserved only for the One LORD God.
REALLY ??? Would you care to explain that? The definition of that title is in Isaiah three times, and it is very emphatic that it is to identify "I the LORD" and "beside me there is no God" and "Mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth." Again, the identity of the Creator, which we already have established from at least two New Testament sources... plus ...
Actually the ultimate defense against blasphemy is when the accused never actually did the acts He is being accused of doing.
You are confused, as shown by your use of all capital letters when writing lord.
Mark 2:27-28
27 And he said unto them, [JESUS]The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:[/JESUS]
28 [JESUS]Therefore the Son of man is lord also of the sabbath.[/JESUS] |
Did you miss who the sabbath was made for?
Did you miss the word "Therefore"?
Did you miss the "made" part? Who MADE the Sabbath? Pretend you are a Jew who has been raised his entire life keeping that Sabbath day from the sixth day sundown to the seventh day sundown, each and every Sabbath reminded of the commandment:
Exodus 20:11 KJV
(11)
For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day:
wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
I didn't make a mistake. There is only one Lord of the Sabbath, that is the LORD. Anyone claiming to be the Lord of the Sabbath is claiming to be the Creator God. The Jews were right when they said "thou makest thyself God." but the mistake they made was in refusing to recognize the signs and miracles he gave of God (thus validating him.) Jesus can say "Therefore" because the Son of Man is the Son of God, and the Son of God is the Creator God. No other explanation makes any sort of sense, there is no other "Lord" of the Sabbath.
Genuine, if we take a step back we might make better progress by defining some rules, or perhaps even attempting to state the other's views as we understand them. I'm not selling a Trinity package, I'm simply maintaining that "Scripture emphatically says this" so therefore "Let us form any other views beneath what it actually said." If we accept the known first then we can legitimately try to create a model or understanding second.
