Jesus Christ has a God that he worships

[onewithhim]

Jesus said that we all must love Jehovah our God and worship only Him. He stated clearly that his Father was the only true God (John 17:3); he didn't say that we are the only true God. In many places in the Scriptures he calls the Father "my God."

"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." (John 17:3, KJV)

"Jesus saith unto her [Mary], Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father, but go to my brethren and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God. (John 20:17, KJV)

"At the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted: My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Mark 15:34, KJV)

"Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall no more go out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name." (Revelation 3:12, KJV)

I think Jesus wants us to recognize that his Father, Jehovah, is God, and he is God's Son. (John 10:36) What do you make of this?

[MissKate13]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #1]
God has a Son He calls Lord. (Hebrews 1:10)

[The Tanager]

Firstly it is by no means a given that Paul is here alluding to anything in Exodus.

I agree it is not a “given”, but I thank you for allowing me to share my reasons why I think it is the most reasonable position to take.

Further, YHWH Jehovah being the creator of all things, is scripturally the source of all glory in whatever way it is manifest (compare Rev 4:11).

There are at least two types of glory. In the sense you are talking about, glory is an abstract idea that is separate from the person receiving the glory. In Exodus, there is also what is sometimes called the Shekinah Glory that guides the Israelites (cloud by day, fire by night, Exod 13:21). This is what causes Moses’ face to be radiant. That’s a concrete presence, not an abstract idea one being has about another.

If Hebrews 1:3 is alluding to the Exodus, Paul is referring to the glory as a presence and saying Jesus is the radiance of God’s glory. The radiant light is the actual Shekinah glory, God’s actual presence. Jesus is called that.

Further, in Hebrews 1:3, Paul uses two different words "radiance" [Gk. apaugasma] and "glory" [doxa] (he does not say Jesus is "the glory of his glory" but the radiance/the brightness of the glory). Granted this expression is somewhat ambiguous, in that the word apaugasma is unique in scripture, but logically all brightness has a source.

I think Paul is combining both senses of ‘glory’ here: presence and the abstract concept, where it makes sense to say radiance (presence) of God’s glory (abstract concept).

You may be doing that in this post* but your original point was that first century Jewish Christians had no concept of greater and lesser elohim and therefore Thomas could not have had anyone in mind but the Almighty when he addressed Jesus as "my elohim". That point is demonstrably false.

No, your understanding of my original point was that; I never meant that. I have since better clarified my point for you. Now, actually understanding each other, we can talk about the actual point I’ve been trying to make all along.

* I see no point in switching to translational issues , the potential limitations of which you yourself have already highlighted.

What potential limitations do you think I highlighted? Translational issues are extremely important when talking about what Thomas called Jesus since he probably spoke in Hebrew, but we have holy scripture recording it in Greek. Assuming Thomas said my elohim, John translates him as saying my theos, a term that Greek speaking Christians used to refer to God and false gods, but never angels (unlike how Hebrews would use the same term for all three concepts). Either John got it right or wrong? What do you think?

And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and underneath the earth and on the sea, and all the things in them, saying: “To the One sitting on the throne and to the Lamb be the blessing and the honor and the glory and the might forever and ever.”

Do you think the underlined wording is worship? If not, why not?

[JehovahsWitness]

...The radiant light is the actual Shekinah glory, God’s actual presence. Jesus is called that

Where is Jesus called the "Shekinah" light?

You may be doing that in this post but your original point was that first century Jewish Christians had no concept of greater and lesser elohim and therefore Thomas could not have had anyone in mind but the Almighty when he addressed Jesus as "my elohim". That point is demonstrably false.

.... I never meant that.

then please explain what you meant below ...

... My original challenge was about believing in different levels of actual Gods. Jesus’s early Jewish disciples did not hold such a belief.

REVELATION 5:13 NWT

And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and underneath the earth and on the sea, and all the things in them, saying: “To the One sitting on the throne and to the Lamb be the blessing and the honor and the glory and the might forever and ever.”

Do you think the underlined wording is worship?

No.

why not?

Because they are different words with different meanings

[The Tanager]

Where is Jesus called the "Shekinah" light?

I’m not saying that he is directly called the Shekinah light, but indirectly so. I’m saying the “radiance of his glory” is Paul’s way of alluding to the Shekinah light.

then please explain what you meant below …

... My original challenge was about believing in different levels of actual Gods. Jesus’s early Jewish disciples did not hold such a belief.

Different levels of Gods (capitalized), not elohim. I was saying that the early Jewish [Christian] disciples did not believe in multiple actual gods. Not elohim, but what English speaking people usually think about when they hear the term ‘god’.

Because they are different words with different meanings

Okay, so what are some examples for you of what one would say if they were worshiping Jehovah?

[JehovahsWitness]

Where is Jesus called the "Shekinah" light?

I’m not saying that he is directly called the Shekinah light, but indirectly so. I’m saying the “radiance of his glory” is Paul’s way of alluding to the Shekinah light.

So, actually at no time is Jesus called the Shekinah light. Without being circular (or calling on trinitarian bias) what is the scriptural or contextual support for this assumption? And how is it relevant to the point you are making ?

I was saying that the early Jewish [Christian] disciples did not believe in multiple actual gods.

They certainly did not worship multiple gods but is not Jesus recorded [in greek] as pointing out they recognised the existence multiple actual gods [Greek theos ]* ie the concept was not foreign to them.

JOHN 10:34 - 36

Jesus answered them: “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said: “You are gods [Gr: theos/ Hebrew : elohim]”’? If he called ‘gods’ those against whom the word of God [Gr: theos/ Hebrew : elohim] came—and yet the scripture cannot be nullified— do you say to me* whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?

* John no doubt recorded Jesus words in the Greek language ; Greek does not have capital letters.

Because they are different words with different meanings

Okay, so what are some examples for you of what one would say if they were worshiping Jehovah?

REVELATION 4

10 the 24 elders+ fall down before the One seated on the throne and worship the One who lives forever and ever, and they cast their crowns before the throne, saying: 11 “You are worthy, Jehovah* our God, to receive the glory+ and the honor+ and the power, because you created all things,+ and because of your will they came into existence and were created.”

[The Tanager]

So, actually at no time is Jesus called the Shekinah light. Without being circular (or calling on trinitarian bias) what is the scriptural or contextual support for this assumption? And how is it relevant to the point you are making?

It is not an assumption; it is a conclusion. I didn’t call on a trinitarian foundation at all. I didn’t reason circularly at all. It comes contextually from the passage we’ve been discussing this whole time (Hebrews 1) for the reasons I’ve been sharing. The early Christian authors were always pulling on imagery from the Hebrew scriptures. A big image of God’s glory in the Hebrew scriptures involved the shining, radiant light that is called the Shekinah Glory. Paul would not have talked about glory being radiant without that image in mind and without knowing the Jewish audience would connect those words to that image.

They certainly did not worship multiple gods but is not Jesus recorded [in greek] as pointing out they recognised the existence multiple actual gods [Greek theos ]* ie the concept was not foreign to them.

No, John doesn’t record Jesus as pointing out the disciples recognize the existence of multiple actual[i/] gods. John records Jesus as quoting Psalm 82:6 which uses the word ‘elohim’, but uses that word to speak about humans who (like the false gods) aren’t judging justly (82:2). Instead, they have no knowledge and understanding and walk in darkness (82:5). These human rulers think they have power and will live forever, but they will fall and die (82:6-7). So, in John 10, these humans that Jesus says to whom the word of God came are called ‘gods’, (elohim, in this false god sense.

Okay, so what are some examples for you of what one would say if they were worshiping Jehovah?
REVELATION 4

10 the 24 elders+ fall down before the One seated on the throne and worship the One who lives forever and ever, and they cast their crowns before the throne, saying: 11 “You are worthy, Jehovah* our God, to receive the glory+ and the honor+ and the power, because you created all things,+ and because of your will they came into existence and were created.”

So, the act of offering glory, honor, and power is not worship; it’s the reasons one performs this act that is ‘worship’?

[JehovahsWitness]

So, actually at no time is Jesus called the Shekinah light. Without being circular (or calling on trinitarian bias) what is the scriptural or contextual support for this assumption? And how is it relevant to the point you are making?

... Paul would not have talked about glory being radiant without that image in mind ...

1. Prove that with scripture. As in, refer to some other scripture to prove that Paul must have been refering to the "Shekinah light" because he refered to Jesus' "radiance" and/or "glory".

2. What is your overall point? ie If Paul does refer to Jesus as the Shekinah light(a conclusion which has yet to be proven scripturally) , what idea does that in your opinion , support: Ils ont clear to me what your overall point is. Do you have one?

Jesus as quoting Psalm 82:6 which uses the word ‘elohim’, but uses that word to speak about humans ...

Yes, and he acknowledged that the scripture was true and accurate in calling them "elohim" (recorded in Greek by the inspired writer as ... theos). and unless you are suggesting these "human "gods" (theos) were considered equal to the One True God (also theos) , then the first Christians indeed were familiar with the notion of a Supreme Almighty God and lesser gods (both of which are refered to as theos in Greek).

That is unless you are suggesting the Christian writer John got it wrong and should not have rendered the Elohim--> theos.

So, the act of offering glory, honor, and power is not worship; it’s the reasons one performs this act that is ‘worship’?

No, whether an act is considered "worship" or not is determinded by why you worship but by to whom one is directing the acts

- to Almighty God (YHWH /Jehovah) = worship
- to anyone else = obeisance /respect

If the act or words are that should be directly uniquely to the Supreme God are directed to anyone (or anything else) that would be idolatry or blasphemy. While glorifying , honoring and acknowledging the power of someone je not necessarily worship, glorifying , honoring and acknowledging the power of someone as Jehovah the Supreme creator and ultimate source of all life is.

[The Tanager]

1. Prove that with scripture. As in, refer to some other scripture to prove that Paul must have been refering to the "Shekinah light" because he refered to Jesus' "radiance" and/or "glory".

I’ve referred to the passages in Exodus that describe the Shekinah glory and how Moses’ face shined. For Paul and his Jewish readers to not connect glory with that major image of God is unreasonable.

2. What is your overall point? ie If Paul does refer to Jesus as the Shekinah light(a conclusion which has yet to be proven scripturally) , what idea does that in your opinion , support: Ils ont clear to me what your overall point is. Do you have one?

My point has been that the light was connected to God’s presence. Calling Jesus that Shekinah light would be saying Jesus is God’s presence itself.

Yes, and he acknowledged that the scripture was true and accurate in calling them "elohim" (recorded in Greek by the inspired writer as ... theos). and unless you are suggesting these "human "gods" (theos) were considered equal to the One True God (also theos) , then the first Christians indeed were familiar with the notion of a Supreme Almighty God and lesser gods (both of which are refered to as theos in Greek).

That is unless you are suggesting the Christian writer John got it wrong and should not have rendered the Elohim--> theos.

Not lesser gods, but false gods. John is translating Jesus as saying Psalm 82 calls humans false gods. Christians were familiar with the notion of a Supreme Almighty God, false gods, and angels. When translating their thoughts to Greek, they don’t call Jesus an angel. They don’t think He is a false god. That leaves one option: the Supreme Almighty God.

No, whether an act is considered "worship" or not is determinded by why you worship but by to whom one is directing the acts

- to Almighty God (YHWH /Jehovah) = worship
- to anyone else = obeisance /respect


If the act or words are that should be directly uniquely to the Supreme God are directed to anyone (or anything else) that would be idolatry or blasphemy. While glorifying , honoring and acknowledging the power of someone je not necessarily worship, glorifying , honoring and acknowledging the power of someone as Jehovah the Supreme creator and ultimate source of all life is.

Either (1) you are arguing in a circle or (2) have a bad definition of worship. On the first, the question under discussion is whether Rev 5:13 shows the Lamb as God or not. Your conclusion is that the Lamb isn’t God. Your support? Because you must be Almighty God to be worshiped and the Lamb isn’t God. So, the Lamb isn’t God because the Lamb isn’t God. How is that not circular?


On the second, worship is an act. One can worship things that aren’t God. Exodus 34:14 says to not worship any other god; it doesn’t say you can’t worship any other god, that act would be called something else.

[onewithhim]

1. Prove that with scripture. As in, refer to some other scripture to prove that Paul must have been refering to the "Shekinah light" because he refered to Jesus' "radiance" and/or "glory".

I’ve referred to the passages in Exodus that describe the Shekinah glory and how Moses’ face shined. For Paul and his Jewish readers to not connect glory with that major image of God is unreasonable.

2. What is your overall point? ie If Paul does refer to Jesus as the Shekinah light(a conclusion which has yet to be proven scripturally) , what idea does that in your opinion , support: Ils ont clear to me what your overall point is. Do you have one?

My point has been that the light was connected to God’s presence. Calling Jesus that Shekinah light would be saying Jesus is God’s presence itself.

Saying that Jesus is God's presence itself is a stretch, inferring that Jesus is God. Jesus represents his Father, God, so that God doesn't have to be here on the earth, He being too majestic to be here.

[JehovahsWitness]

1. Prove that with scripture. As in, refer to some other scripture to prove that Paul must have been refering to the "Shekinah light" because he refered to Jesus' "radiance" and/or "glory".

I’ve referred to the passages in Exodus that describe the Shekinah glory and how Moses’ face shined. For Paul and his Jewish readers to not connect glory with that major image of God is unreasonable.

So? Moses wore sandals so did Jesus . So was Jesus Moses sandals ? The existence of a word (glory) in two unrelated passages (without any indication from the writer that he is linking one with the other) is taking a scripturally unsupported liberty in interpretation.

For Paul and his Jewish readers to not connect glory with that major image of God is unreasonable.

Prove it! So far I see nothing but your own rhetoric. No scripture linking the proposal to the conclusion: no validation.

My point has been that the light was connected to God’s presence. Calling Jesus that Shekinah light would be saying Jesus is God’s presence itself.

No it wouldn't because the Shekinah light represented God's presence, God wasn't literally the light itself (see 1 Kings 8:27)

.. Christians were familiar with the notion of a Supreme Almighty God, false gods, and angels.

Agreed. AND (unless you are suggesting the early disciples were unfamiliar with the teachings if Christ) they also knew Jesus called humans judges elohim /theos. Are you suggesting these same disciples believed all the aforementioned were EQUAL?

...the question under discussion is whether Rev 5:13 shows the Lamb as God or not.

No the question under discussion is whether Rev 5:11-14 depicts "the Lamb" (Jesus) as being worshipped or not. ..

Rev 5:11-14 involves one act of worship to both the One on the throne and the Lamb.

...worship is an act. One can worship things that aren’t God.

Yes one can: I have never said otherwise.

Exodus 34:14 says to not worship any other god; it doesn’t say you can’t worship any other god....

Correct: Why are you pointing this out to me ? did I say that the worship of other gods is impossible?

...that act [of worshipping other gods ] would be called something else.

Correct: So ?