The Unitarian belief that Jesus is not God causes those who offer worship to the Father's Throne (where Jesus sits) to be guilty of idolatry.

[praise_yeshua]

its a mess which means every instance where there is no definite article it doesn't refer to the " one" God of the Bible.

He clearly doesn't understand "definite articleS" in Greek.

 

[civic]

He clearly doesn't understand "definite articleS" in Greek.

agreed which tells me he hasn't even had a single semester of basic N.T. Greek under his belt. I call it winging it and shooting at the hip hoping something sticks.

 

[synergy]

In John 1 there is just plain "theos" and then there is the theos with "ton Theon." A God who is not "THE GOD" is a god with the God.

False. That's not Greek. Thats JW anti-Greek talk. JWs are calling Greeks stupid. It's JWs that are diabolical in their quest to trample on the Greek language in order to prop themselves up.

Soundly supported by the Greek and English grammar. Seems you can't get past this.

No. This is the JW version of Greek that reeks of vomit.

 

[synergy]

He clearly doesn't understand "definite articleS" in Greek.

Exactly! That is JW vomit that unitarians are promoting.

 

[praise_yeshua]

The way to tell whether the pronoun is masculine, or feminine, or neuter is to understand the context of what is being discussed. This applies to when Greek is translated into English as well, but it doesn't necessarily depend on the gender of the word in Greek. For example, the Holy Spirit is in the neuter in Greek but masculine pronouns are typically applied in translating to English.

What a "word salad"......

There are so many things wrong with what you just said.... I don't know where to start to unravel this crazy "word salad".

You should realize that the "GW" version loves "Gender inclusion".

 

[Runningman]

Well unfortunately for you The Father is also lord so the verse is not actually limiting

And you failed to deal with my evidence Jesus is Jehovah based upon the Shema of Israel and the greek translation and the verse 1 Cor 8:6

Jesus isn't the one God for us Christians in 1 Corinthians 8:6 or anywhere. You have made an invalid point.

BTW Christ is over all

Romans 9:5 (KJV 1900) — 5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

This is a rather amateur argument and proves to me you don't have much experience in these kind of discussions. As you know, the original Greek did not contain and punctuation, but in any case this verse still proves that Jesus is not God in the KJV.

Jesus is not over God the Father in Scripture and he will be made subject to God in the future. After that, God will be "all in all."

1 Corinthians 15
27For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Revelation 17:14 (KJV 1900) — 14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

What about it?

 

[TomL]

If you still think it's stupid then the subject won't change. How is a reference to two Gods in one sentence with only one of them being called The God not a reference to two seperate Gods?

So now instead of arguing the word is an impersonal thing you want to argue he is now another God

This would be contradictory to your claim the word was an impersonal thing

However They are not two Gods but one

Remember the trinity does not teach

there are three gods

that the son is the father (you have appeared to confuse this a number of times)

Rather it teaches there is one God who manifests himself equally, eternally and simultaneously as three persons

The three are God (deity) but they are not each other

 

[praise_yeshua]

agreed which tells me he hasn't even had a single semester of basic N.T. Greek under his belt. I call it winging it and shooting at the hip hoping something sticks.

The fact he appeals to the GW tells us he doesn't understand ancient cultural appeal to gender.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

So you're really going to insist upon a "chair". What value does the "chair" bring? You're making rudimentary mistakes and endlessly conflating.

Care to give one single verse that details a chair associated with God.




Many governmental "thrones" have benches. You're so caught up in your own silliness, that you miss the simplest of things.

By all means, try again.

Dear readers

A throne as a chair where one single person sits, is an analogy often used in Scripture.
It is not a "bench", and that's why a person could sit on the right hand of a throne.
That's also why Scripture refers to "the one" sitting on a throne. There is no room for anyone else.
It is meant to represent the singularity of the monarch sitting on his chair, and the honor the monarch confers to the person sitting on his right hand.



Now, if there are "benches" in any country where many people sit to co-rule, that's exactly the meaning of "throne" in Revelation 3:21. Christ allows us to co-rule with Him, as God allowed Christ to co-rule with Him.
Neither we become Christ by sitting on his "bench", nor Christ becomes God for sitting on his "bench".

Let's remember that @synergy opened this thread to argue that Unitarianism would be guilty of idolatry, since in Revelation chapter 4 people worship the one on the throne, Christ sits on that throne as per Revelation 3:21, and Unitarians do not believe Christ is God.
This argumentation is incorrect. There is only one on the throne and that's exactly why the text says
"There was a throne set in heaven with One sitting on the throne!" (Rev 4:2)
The Lamb is not at the throne and that's exactly why the Lamb could "came and took the scroll out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne." There is only one "Him", and that "Him" is not the Lamb.

 

[TomL]

Jesus isn't the one God for us Christians in 1 Corinthians 8:6 or anywhere. You have made an invalid point.

He is the one lord - the heis Kyrios - of Mark 12:29 the Jehovah echad of Deut 6:4

God the father by your reasoning is not lord

This is a rather amateur argument and proves to me you don't have much experience in these kind of discussions. As you know, the original Greek did not contain and punctuation, but in any case this verse still proves that Jesus is not God in the KJV.

You make me laugh

You can't follow context, can't handle the Greek, do not understand the Greek present tense, and even have problems with english grammar

Jesus is not over God the Father in Scripture and he will be made subject to God in the future. After that, God will be "all in all."

1 Corinthians 15
27For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

What about it?

Um that does nothing at all to show the nature of the word/Christ differs from the nature of the father

As the husband is the head of the woman

a boss of his employer etc

does not make one of another nature than the other

Hebrews 1:3 (UASV) — 3 He is the radiance of his glory and the exact representation of his nature, and he sustains all things by the word of his power. When he made purification for our sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.

 

[synergy]

The God's word translation calls the Word an it in John 1:14 and 1 John 1:1-3 calls the Word an it in most versions, but your reply only proves to me how inept you are.

The way to tell whether the pronoun is masculine, or feminine, or neuter is to understand the context of what is being discussed. This applies to when Greek is translated into English as well, but it doesn't necessarily depend on the gender of the word in Greek. For example, the Holy Spirit is in the neuter in Greek but masculine pronouns are typically applied in translating to English.

So the fact that the Word is masculine doesn't necessarily matter. The subject is more important.

Since the Word is an it in 1 John 1:1-3 then the Word can be an it in John 1:14. The Greek proves it.

Show me the exact Greek word that the GWT translators derived the English word "it" from in John 1:14 or John 1:1-3. Failing that, the GWT can take its place alongside the Quran and the NWT.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

There are various sects of Islamic beliefs that teach that lying to an enemy is righteous.

That's a very different statement.

 

[synergy]

You're all over the place Tom. Why not just be honest and admit you didn't originally ask what you claimed you did? It's not a big deal. People make honest mistakes and forget things. There is no shame in it, but why would you publicly be dishonest about what you said when I will absolutely not let you live that down for at least a couple more comments?

The Great Tempter has spoken.

 

[synergy]

Dear readers

A throne as a chair where one single person sits, is an analogy often used in Scripture.
It is not a "bench", and that's why a person could sit on the right hand of a throne.
That's also why Scripture refers to "the one" sitting on a throne. There is no room for anyone else.
It is meant to represent the singularity of the monarch sitting on his chair, and the honor the monarch confers to the person sitting on his right hand.

View attachment 1002

Now, if there are "benches" in any country where many people sit to co-rule, that's exactly the meaning of "throne" in Revelation 3:21. Christ allows us to co-rule with Him, as God allowed Christ to co-rule with Him.
Neither we become Christ by sitting on his "bench", nor Christ becomes God for sitting on his "bench".

Let's remember that @synergy opened this thread to argue that Unitarianism would be guilty of idolatry, since in Revelation chapter 4 people worship the one on the throne, Christ sits on that throne as per Revelation 3:21, and Unitarians do not believe Christ is God.
This argumentation is incorrect. There is only one on the throne and that's exactly why the text says
"There was a throne set in heaven with One sitting on the throne!" (Rev 4:2)
The Lamb is not at the throne and that's exactly why the Lamb could "came and took the scroll out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne." There is only one "Him", and that "Him" is not the Lamb.

Rev 3:21 says that Jesus sat down with His Father in His Father's Throne.

Is that fellow, to the right of the King, in the King's Throne?

Nope, your example fails.

Side Note: Did you notice that the fellow has three legs?

 

[praise_yeshua]

Dear readers

A throne as a chair where one single person sits, is an analogy often used in Scripture.

Liar. There is no such thing as a chair mentioned anywhere in Scripture. PROVE IT. I already know the answer.

It is not a "bench", and that's why a person could sit on the right hand of a throne.

No. You are so so unlearned. I can sit at the "right hand" on a bench. It matters which way you're facing. You don't understand "right hand" of anything.

That's also why Scripture refers to "the one" sitting on a throne. There is no room for anyone else.
It is meant to represent the singularity of the monarch sitting on his chair, and the honor the monarch confers to the person sitting on his right hand.

Liar. I bet your wife doesn't like you very well at all. Do you know what a "loveseat" is and why it is referenced as a "loveseat"?

YOU want to RULE like a MAN..... That what YOU WANT TO DO. That is why YOU envision your evil imaginations upon Jesus Christ. YOU are evil. As much as Jesus Christ loves mankind. He will not endure the unwilling affection of men like yourself. At every turn, your seek to dishonor Jesus Christ.

Now, if there are "benches" in any country where many people sit to co-rule, that's exactly the meaning of "throne" in Revelation 3:21. Christ allows us to co-rule with Him, as God allowed Christ to co-rule with Him.
Neither we become Christ by sitting on his "bench", nor Christ becomes God for sitting on his "bench".

You are not going to RULE..... with anyone. You love the idea of "RULING". I know you do. You love the idea because you're evil.

God actually only RULES those that disagree with Him. Those that agree "walk together". However, there is certainly a "RANK" within this agreement. This is what you fail to understand because you have no idea what the Holy Trinity teaches.

Yet, here you are.... seeking to instruct others. Pitiful.

Isn't it interesting how this false teacher declares that there is only a "chair" relative to a throne and then demands that there is a "bench" for a throne.

As usual, nothing but doubleminded nonsense.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Rev 3:21 says that Jesus sat down with His Father in His Father's Throne.

Certainly it does. It also says that all saints will sit in Jesus throne just in the same way Jesus sits on His Father throne.

It is also certain that Mark 14:61,62, Acts 2:33, Acts 5:30-31, Romans 8:34 Ephesians 1:17-20, Hebrews 8:1 Hebrews 10:12 Hebrews 12:2 1 Peter 3:21,22, and Revelation 4:2 + 5:1,7 say that Jesus does not sit in his Father's Throne.

Is that fellow, to the right of the King, in the King's Throne?

No, he is not.
He is on the right of the king, just as in the analogy present in Mark 14:61,62, Acts 2:33, Acts 5:30-31, Romans 8:34 Ephesians 1:17-20, Hebrews 8:1 Hebrews 10:12 Hebrews 12:2 1 Peter 3:21,22, and Revelation 4:2 + 5:1,7

Nope, your example fails.

It would fail if the "throne" in Rev 3:21 were a chair. It does not if it is a government.
In contrast, the idea of Jesus sitting in the throne of the Father fails to explain Mark 14:61,62, Acts 2:33, Acts 5:30-31, Romans 8:34, Ephesians 1:17-20, Hebrews 8:1 Hebrews 10:12 Hebrews 12:2 1 Peter 3:21,22, and Revelation 4:2 + 5:1,7

More importantly, Revelation 4:2 + 5:1,7, as this is the basis for the OP.

Side Note: Did you notice that the fellow has three legs?

No! I hadn't noticed! Good catch! This is what AI does sometimes.

 

[praise_yeshua]

That's a very different statement.

Lying is lying. Nothing changes that fact. I didn't elaborate until you insisted I somehow aligned with those who killed innocent people.

 

[synergy]

Certainly it does. It also says that all saints will sit in Jesus throne just in the same way Jesus sits on His Father throne.

That's why your illustrations fails to make your point.

It is also certain that Mark 14:61,62, Acts 2:33, Acts 5:30-31, Romans 8:34 Ephesians 1:17-20, Hebrews 8:1 Hebrews 10:12 Hebrews 12:2 1 Peter 3:21,22, and Revelation 4:2 + 5:1,7 say that Jesus does not sit in his Father's Throne.

I'm sure that Jesus can do alot of things in the Father's Throne, like sit, stand, talk, etc....

Note: I apologize for not reading everyone of the verses you mentioned. I'm just responding to what you wrote.

No, he is not.
He is on the right of the king, just as in the analogy present in Mark 14:61,62, Acts 2:33, Acts 5:30-31, Romans 8:34 Ephesians 1:17-20, Hebrews 8:1 Hebrews 10:12 Hebrews 12:2 1 Peter 3:21,22, and Revelation 4:2 + 5:1,7

Again, thats why your illustration fails to make your point.

It would fail if the "throne" in Rev 3:21 were a chair. It does not if it is a government.
In contrast, the idea of Jesus sitting in the throne of the Father fails to explain Mark 14:61,62, Acts 2:33, Acts 5:30-31, Romans 8:34, Ephesians 1:17-20, Hebrews 8:1 Hebrews 10:12 Hebrews 12:2 1 Peter 3:21,22, and Revelation 4:2 + 5:1,7

The Father's Throne is not a government and those who sit there are worshiped as God. That's why Jesus can sit there.

More importantly, Revelation 4:2 + 5:1,7, as this is the basis for the OP.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here.

No! I hadn't noticed! Good catch! This is what AI does sometimes.

What AI application did you run to generate that image?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Liar. There is no such thing as a chair mentioned anywhere in Scripture. PROVE IT. I already know the answer.
No. You are so so unlearned. I can sit at the "right hand" on a bench. It matters which way you're facing. You don't understand "right hand" of anything.
Liar. I bet your wife doesn't like you very well at all. Do you know what a "loveseat" is and why it is referenced as a "loveseat"?

Dear readers:

In Scripture throne does not refer to benches or loveseats.
The analogy of a throne used in the Bible is that of a chair for a single person, because that is how thrones were used.
Archeology supports this concept. In Internet you can find hundreds of images of thrones in ancient Egypt, Persia, Babylon, Greece and Rome.
For example, this one, of the first century in Rome, when the NT was being written.
The "bench" argument and the "loveseat" argument are unsupported. They have been refuted.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Certainly it does. It also says that all saints will sit in Jesus throne just in the same way Jesus sits on His Father throne.

It is also certain that Mark 14:61,62, Acts 2:33, Acts 5:30-31, Romans 8:34 Ephesians 1:17-20, Hebrews 8:1 Hebrews 10:12 Hebrews 12:2 1 Peter 3:21,22, and Revelation 4:2 + 5:1,7 say that Jesus does not sit in his Father's Throne.

You certainly are adapting with this "work in progress" defense you're building.

Make a "rank" argument. I'm waiting for it. Such discussion always lead here. You don't know this because you're inexperienced.

This is what AI does sometimes.

At least you admit that you're blindly referencing an AI return. There might be hope for you yet.

Get your other Unitarian "friends" in the forum to admit the same.