latreuō

cjab said:
Wrong jurisdiction. Those reigning with Christ are pre-eminently in heaven.

Rev 22:5 "And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever."

As is Rev 22:3.

You changed the context back to earth, when the whole of Rev 22 relates to heaven. So you're comparing apples and oranges.
Click to expand...

Thanks for pointing out the use of "and" because in several passages in the Book of Revelation what is being described does NOT rule out the Lord Jesus. He is being referred to.

The Lamb is worshiped for possessing these attributes.
Revelation 5:13
And every created thing which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all things in them, I heard saying, “To Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, be blessing and honor and glory and dominion forever and ever.”

Many will want to hide from the wrath of the Lamb.
Revelation 6:16
and they said to the mountains and to the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the presence of Him who sits on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb.

The Lord Jesus will reign forever and ever (Luke 1:33).
Revelation 11:15
Then the seventh angel sounded; 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 will reign forever and ever.”

They will reign with Christ for a thousand years (cf. 20:4).
Revelation 20:6
Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years.

The city is shined on by the Lamb.
Revelation 21:23
And the city has no need of the sun or of the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God has illumined it, and its lamp is the Lamb.

The river of life comes from the Lamb.
Revelation 22:1
Then he showed me a river of the water of life, clear as crystal, coming from the throne of God and of the Lamb.

The bond-servants will render latreuō unto the Lamb.
Revelation 22:3
There will no longer be any curse; and the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and His bond-servants will serve Him.
 
cjab said:
Rev 22:5 "And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever."
Click to expand...

Revelation 22:5
And there will no longer be any night; and they will not have need of the light of a lamp nor the light of the sun, because the Lord God will illumine them; and they will reign forever and ever. (NASB).
Revelation 22:5 reads that the "Lord God will illumine them". Notice how in Revelation 21:23 that this is also attributed to the Lord Jesus.
Revelation 21:23
And the city has no need of the sun or of the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God has illumined it, and its lamp is the Lamb. (NASB)

See my previous post for the use of "and" which demonstrates the Lord Jesus is the proper recipient of what is being described....every time.
 
Fred said:
See my previous post for the use of "and" which demonstrates the Lord Jesus is the proper recipient of what is being described....every time.
Click to expand...
First I never "ruled out" Jesus. I indicated that the Father always has the pre-eminence over Jesus in the divine order cf. 1 Cor 11:3. That observation cannot be faulted.

Excepting Revelation 6:16, which applies to the wrath of the lamb alone, in his God-given role as judge of all the earth, all the texts says "God and the Lamb". Look into the apostolic declarations of praise: they always praise the Father and the Son separately and individually. That is because they are eternally distinguisable and severable conceptually in the divine order, even if functioning as one "God" over men. However there are not two Gods, but one, akin in the world to an agent-principal relation which functions as one, even though there are two parties.

It seems to be your contention that God and the lamb are one person. Such has been deemed a heresy for circa 1800 years.
 
cjab said:
First I never "ruled out" Jesus.
Click to expand...

Thus, proving He is the proper recipient of latreuō - the worship only due unto God.

cjab said:
It seems to be your contention that God and the lamb are one person.
Click to expand...

Post 21 makes it clear that your confusion is unfounded. In addition to what was written there, is the following:
Revelation 7:10
and they cry out with a loud voice, saying, “Salvation to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.”
 
Last edited:
Fred said:
Thus, proving He is the proper recipient of latreuō - the worship only due unto God.



Post 21 makes it clear that your confusion is unfounded. In addition to what was written there, is the following:
Revelation 7:10
and they cry out with a loud voice, saying, “Salvation to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.”
Click to expand...
No, your formula "[Jesus] is the proper recipient of latreuō - the worship only due unto God" make it clear that no other person is the proper recipient of latreuō, thus rendering Jesus and the Father "one [divine] person" which as Tertullian pointed out was the heresy of Sabellius and Noetus.
 
cjab said:
No, your formula "[Jesus] is the proper recipient of latreuō - the worship only due unto God" make it clear that no other person is the proper recipient of latreuō,
Click to expand...

Thus, proving Jesus is God.

The Lord Jesus affirmed that latreuō is due unto God alone in Luke 4:8. It is not to be given to any creature (Romans 1:25).
 
cjab said:
No, I'm reading Christian von Bunsen's "Hippolytus and his age" at present.
Click to expand...

Mean nothing if you take the Humpty Dumpty approach in redefining what words really mean.

cjab said:
The nursery is your domain.
Click to expand...
Thanks (Luke 18:17), because it is important to have humility and not be arrogant just because the meaning of words don't agree with your heresy.
 
Fred said:
Thanks (Luke 18:17), because it is important to have humility and not be arrogant just because the meaning of words don't agree with your heresy.
Click to expand...
Since you're not able to identify any heresy in me, by name or by description, your post amounts to naked slander. The penalty for liars is severe: check out what happened to Ananias.
 
cjab said:
your post amounts to naked slander. The penalty for liars is severe: check out what happened to Ananias.
Click to expand...

Look in the mirror, genius. That is what you do by your accusations of me holding to Sabellianism.

Get a serious clue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top