LOL @ Brummies cartoon. Hey, since I was born and raised in Florida and moved away years ago, does that make me smarter now?
I have to concur that my "coming to Christ" was whilst in a state of belief of JW Dogma, but through a growing comprehension that Christ hadn't been preached correctly by the JW's (e.g. Rev.5:12-14, which I'd appreciate, if you would tackle). That awareness of Christ was the liberating factor, and my understanding grew day by day.
LittleToe, thank you for the complimentary words. As stated elsewhere, I was raised in the First Assembly of God religion, sort of an offshoot of the Pentecostals. The idea that Jesus was God or even equal to God was foreign to me, until 1971 when I married a Catholic woman. It is my understanding now that the AoG is a Trinitarian religion, but I sure never got that impression growing up. As a small child, I took serious the relationship I was taught as to Jesus being sent, being the Son, and such.
When I was baptized a JW and even during my study, I had trouble grasping the JWs concept of Jesus, as they pretty much relegate him to nothingness. While I disagree that he is God or even equal to God, he has been placed in a central position to mankind, by the Father. To me, even though this may confuse some, he is a god, in the sense that mans salvation was placed in his hands. Much like the useage of the word god at 2 Cor. 4:4, denoting Satan as the god of this world, I see it as equally applying to Jesus, but as the one who saves mankind, not the one who will destroy it.
That being said, lets look at the Revelation verses you requested:
Revelation 5: 12. Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, honour, and glory, and blessing.
13. And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.
14.
And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever. (KJV)
I dont readily remember your earlier comments, but I am assuming you are looking at the worship offered Jesus here. With that in mind, here are some portions of my thoughts and quotes from other posts I have done over the years;
"Much of the confusion which obstructs clear thinking about the Godhead may be traced to a prime cause. We have not reckoned with changes in the meaning of words, effected by time, as language is transplanted from one culture to another." (The Doctrine of the Trinity: Christianity's Self Inflicted Wound, 1998, Anthony F. Buzzard, Charles F. Hunting, International Scholars Publications, Page 3)
"The meaning of words must be sought within the environment in which they were written. The Bible was not composed in the 20th century, nor did it's writers know anything of the subsequent creeds and councils. Context is all-important in determining the author's intent. Within the pages of [the Bible] Jesus never referred to himself as God." (The Doctrine of the Trinity: Christianity's Self Inflicted Wound, 1998, Anthony F. Buzzard, Charles F. Hunting, International Scholars Publications, Page 84)
"The irony of this bitter age-old controversy is that all factions, unitarians, Binitarians, and Trinitarians, claim to be worshipping only one God. Those who insist that Jesus is God argue that he is worthy of worship, an act offered only to God. If that point were sustained, we would have to conclude that two persons are worthy of worship as God. To propose a Godhead of two or three persons contradicts the many plain biblical statements that God is a single person. It is futile to escape this conclusion that by holding that the creeds do not mean by person what we mean today mean by person. In the Bible the Father and Jesus are obviously persons in the modern sense -- two different individuals."
"The solution to the puzzle is that "worship" in Scripture is offered not only to God but to human persons who hold positions of dignity. The point is obscured in translation by the fact that that the Greek verb proskuneo is used both of worship to God and doing obeisance to human persons. Thus, for example, the king of Israel is worshipped in association with God (1 Chron 29:20 KJV). Daniel was worshipped (Dan 2:46). The saints are worshipped (Rev 3:9 KJV). Jesus is worshipped as Messiah, but only one person, the Father, is worthy of worship as God. It is highly significant that another Greek word, latreuo, which is used of religious service only, is applied exclusively to the Father in the New Testament" (The Doctrine of the Trinity: Christianity's Self Inflicted Wound, 1998, Anthony F. Buzzard, Charles F. Hunting, International Scholars Publications, Page 134)
In Rev. 5:14, the Greek word used for worshipped is proskuneo, which Strongs defines as:
- to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence
- among the Orientals, esp. the Persians, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence
- in the NT by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication
- used of homage shown to men and beings of superior rank
- to the Jewish high priests
- to God
- to Christ
- to heavenly beings
- to demons
To us today, the word worship carries a much more restrictive sense than it did long ago. We tend to restrict worship soley to God, whereas, even when the King James was written, it was not as restricted. To me, we need to look at the Bible from the mindset of those who actually wrote it, instead of how we tend to think today. Word meanings and thoughts have changed, drastically in some cases, over the centuries.
Please note the following lifted from verse 12 above: "
Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, honour, and glory, and blessing." Obviously, Jesus did not have it at one time or else, he would not have to be receiving it. Remember also, he received all from the Father, it was granted him, not already his.
John 3:35. The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand. (KJV)
John 5:22. For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: (KJV)
Matthew 11: 27. All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him. (KJV)
I hope this addresses your question, LittleToe. If not, let me know and I will clarify myself a little better.
Gumby, to me, the main worthiness of this long drawn out thread is merely to encourage me to keep seeking answers to my questions. I, for one, do not enter these arguments deep discussions with the notion that I can change anyones mind. It is done more for my own benefit to reaffirm my beliefs and seek others thoughts. That somewhere along the line, they usually degenerate into worthless arguing and slandering of each other, always distresses me and ruins the discussion, but both sides are guilty.
I don't pretend to have all the answers, although I have been digging into this subject for many years, first seeking the trinity, since so many were so firmly convinced it was true and I wasn't. Eventually, due to my not actually finding it, I turned my attention to seeking every possible objection to it I could find.
I disagree with those who categorize it as the "central doctrine of Christianity." Although it has been placed there, the central doctrine, in my opinion, is Jesus' commandment to love one another. Whether or not belief or non-belief matters for salvation, I leave in Jesus' hands.
Lew W
