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.

[Peterlag]

Did you really think about this answer? I'm not sure you did.

The Book of Acts and The Book of Peter were not written till many years after the very life of Christ. I could claim that Abraham was a Christian. I believe he was. What would you say then?

I mean Jesus did say that Abraham was pleased/overjoyed to see His day....

Joh 8:56 Your father Abraham was pleased to see that my day was coming. He saw it and was happy.” (GW)

Your father Abraham was overjoyed that he would see my day, and he saw it, and rejoiced.” (REV)

Abraham was not a Christian. He was a Jew. The first one. It is now clear to me that you do not understand the Bible or the power of God.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

We pray to Jesus and worship him as all of Heaven does. Unitarians will be the ones in Heaven with folded hands refusing to worship the Lamb.

Well, I cannot speak for all Unitarians, but I, Pancho Frijoles, will have no problem in praising Jesus, and kneeling down to Him.
It will be an incredible honor and source of joy for me!

 

[Peterlag]

Sorry, there was no formulized Roman Catholic Church is those early days

And all the quotes are pre 300 a.D.

The Catholics picked this trinity up from the Pagans early on. Not to long after the Apostles were gone. I would not even be surprised if the Catholics were around to help kill the Apostles and then after they grew in numbers were given the Catholic name. Some historians say holy water showed up in letters as early as 90 AD.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Where is Muhammad and Bahá'u'lláh?????

The Book of Revelation was written by the end of the first century.
It was written for Christians in the middle of their trials, to assure them of the victory of Christ.
Remember that they thought that the Second Coming and the realization of the Kingdom on Earth was imminent.
That's the reason why the vision concentrates in God and the Lamb.

Mohammed would come 500 years later, and Bahaullah 1700 years later.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I had provided four verses within the vision of Revelation that show that there is only One Person sitting on the throne.
You have provided a fifth one, that I have highlighted in green. As you can see, the Lamb is mentioned apart.
So, as per the five references provided within the scenario in question (the vision of the throne), there is only One Person on the Throne.

Revelation 3:12 is not within the narrative of the vision (which extends from Rev 4:1 to Rev 5:14) and uses "throne" as a place that can admit millions of people.

****

Now, having said that, you are right when you say that Heaven recognizes the worthiness of the Lamb. That's clear from the text.

As a matter of fact, there is an explicit mentioning of who sits on the Throne, and it is mentioned separate from the Lamb.

And they cried out in a loud voice: “Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.” (Rev 7:10)

 

[TomL]

The Catholics picked this trinity up from the Pagans early on. Not to long after the Apostles were gone. I would not even be surprised if the Catholics were around to help kill the Apostles and then after they grew in numbers were given the Catholic name. Some historians say holy water showed up in letters as early as 90 AD.

Provide evidence not just claims

 

[Peterlag]

Provide evidence not just claims

Well, I think the evidence is there that the Catholics started the trinity.

 

[TomL]

Well, I think the evidence is there that the Catholics started the trinity.

Your opinion is not evidence

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Jesus is seen in the throne here

Revelation 7:17 (KJV 1900) — 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 5:6 (KJV 1900) — 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.

The Lamb is standing in the midst of the throne as He is in the midst of the four beasts and in the midst of the elders.
For this reason...
The Lamb is not an elder, even if he is seen in standing the midst of the elders.
The Lamb is not a beast, even if he is seen standing in the midst of the beasts
The Lamb is not God, even if he is seen standing in the midst of the throne.

Nowhere in this vision the Lamb sits in the throne of God, which is a different metaphor.
That's why the Lamb can move from where he is, and take the scroll from the Person who sits on the throne:
"The Lamb had seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth. He went and took the scroll from the right hand of him who sat on the throne."

As you see, this verse would make no sense if the Lamb were sitting with God in the same throne.

Revelation 22:1 (KJV 1900) — 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.

As you can see, the author separates "God" from "Lamb".

• If that Lamb is Jesus,... Who is that God?
• If the Lamb is God, why does the author have to say "God" and "Lamb" separately? If the author were Trinitarian, he could have said "Father" and "Lamb" without commiting to "God", as God is triune. Why, then, to separate God from Lamb?
• If the author wants to tell us that two persons sit in the throne, why do five verses say that only One Person sits in the throne?
• If the author wants to tell us that the Lamb also sits in the throne why Rev 7:10 says "Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.” ?

 

[synergy]

I had provided four verses within the vision of Revelation that show that there is only One Person sitting on the throne.
You have provided a fifth one, that I have highlighted in green. As you can see, the Lamb is mentioned apart.
So, as per the five references provided within the scenario in question (the vision of the throne), there is only One Person on the Throne.

Revelation 3:12 is not within the narrative of the vision (which extends from Rev 4:1 to Rev 5:14) and uses "throne" as a place that can admit millions of people.

It's amazing how Rev 3:12 is an introduction of what Rev 4-5 goes into details about. In Rev 4-5, the Father's Throne is introduced, Jesus is found worthy, and all of Heaven prays and prostrates itself in front of the Father's Throne wherein Jesus sits on.

Jesus' Throne is briefly mentioned in Rev 5.

Now, having said that, you are right when you say that Heaven recognizes the worthiness of the Lamb. That's clear from the text.

Where are your buddies Muhammad and Bahá'u'lláh?????

 

[synergy]

Well, I cannot speak for all Unitarians, but I, Pancho Frijoles, will have no problem in praising Jesus, and kneeling down to Him.
It will be an incredible honor and source of joy for me!

Excellent! Great to hear that my friend!

 

[synergy]

The Book of Revelation was written by the end of the first century.
It was written for Christians in the middle of their trials, to assure them of the victory of Christ.
Remember that they thought that the Second Coming and the realization of the Kingdom on Earth was imminent.
That's the reason why the vision concentrates in God and the Lamb.

Mohammed would come 500 years later, and Bahaullah 1700 years later.

Revelations chronicles future events. So again, where are your buddies Muhammad and Bahá'u'lláh who are to happen in Revelation's future?

 

[synergy]

Well, I think the evidence is there that the Catholics started the trinity.

The evidence is that the Catholic Church did not exist until about 800AD or so when it started to fracture away from the rest of the Christian Church.

 

[synergy]

The Catholics picked this trinity up from the Pagans early on. Not to long after the Apostles were gone. I would not even be surprised if the Catholics were around to help kill the Apostles and then after they grew in numbers were given the Catholic name. Some historians say holy water showed up in letters as early as 90 AD.

Unitarianism was already a heresy with the Pharisees and became full blown when the Pharisees attempted to stone Jesus when he declared himself the "I Am" OT God.

 

[Peterlag]

Unitarianism was already a heresy with the Pharisees and became full blown when the Pharisees attempted to stone Jesus when he declared himself the "I Am" OT God.

You guys are going to be in shock if you make heaven and then learn you can't find the Jesus God. You're going to wonder what the heck did you believe your whole Christian life.

 

[Peterlag]

The evidence is that the Catholic Church did not exist until about 800AD or so when it started to fracture away from the rest of the Christian Church.

I would like to see this evidence. I have tried to Google when the Catholics started and most sites say it started with Jesus.

 

[Peterlag]

Your opinion is not evidence

It's not my opinion. Many believe that including this guy...

The life of Jesus, and the subsequent persecution of Christians during the Roman Empire, have come to define what many of us know about early Christianity. The fervent debate, civil strife, and bloody riots within the Christian community as it was forming, however, is a story that is rarely told. Richard E. Rubenstein takes readers to the streets of the Roman Empire during the fourth century, where a divisive argument over the divinity of Jesus Christ was underway. Ruled by a Christian emperor, followers of Jesus no longer feared for the survival of their monotheistic faith, but they found themselves in different camps—led by two charismatic men—on the topic of Christian theology. Arius, an Alexandrian priest and poet, preached that Jesus, though holy, is less than God, while Athanasius, a brilliant and violent bishop, saw any diminution of Jesus' godhead as the work of the devil. Between them stood Alexander, the powerful Bishop of Alexandria, in search of a solution that would keep the empire united and the Christian faith alive.



Here's another one. Two different books...

How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee is a book by American New Testament scholar Bart D. Ehrman. Published on March 25, 2014, by Harper One, the book contends that the historical Jesus did not claim to be divine, nor was he worshipped as such during his life; rather, his status as God the Son in the Trinity in Christian doctrine developed in the years following his crucifixion.[1][2]

Overview​

In How Jesus Became God, Ehrman argues that the historical Jesus did not claim divinity and was not worshipped as divine during his lifetime. Instead, the belief in Jesus as divine arose shortly after his crucifixion, and that the belief in Jesus as God the Son, an incarnation of God and the second divine person (or "prosopon") in the Trinity in Christian doctrine, developed in the following centuries.[1][2][3]

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Unitarianism was already a heresy with the Pharisees and became full blown when the Pharisees attempted to stone Jesus when he declared himself the "I Am" OT God.

What?
My friend: this is the most erroneous statement I have read from you so far… I mean, academically.
No student of first grade Theology at any university would subscribe to such idea.
There was no “Unitarian heresy” at the time of Jesus.

Pharisees never thought thatJesus or the Holy Spirit were Persons of the Trinity simply because… that teaching didn’t exist at that time!!
No Hebrew fisher, housewife, carpenter, peasant, prostitute, scribe, potter, tax collector, merchant or priest thought that The God of Israel was triune. Nobody expected that the Messiah would be God.

Unitarism was not regarded as a heresy until the Council of Nicaea, which took place several generations after those Pharisees (325). Before that Council, it had been just a controversy, and nobody from the Trinitarian side really taught that those on the other side would burn in hell.

 

[TomL]

It's not my opinion. Many believe that including this guy...

The life of Jesus, and the subsequent persecution of Christians during the Roman Empire, have come to define what many of us know about early Christianity. The fervent debate, civil strife, and bloody riots within the Christian community as it was forming, however, is a story that is rarely told. Richard E. Rubenstein takes readers to the streets of the Roman Empire during the fourth century, where a divisive argument over the divinity of Jesus Christ was underway. Ruled by a Christian emperor, followers of Jesus no longer feared for the survival of their monotheistic faith, but they found themselves in different camps—led by two charismatic men—on the topic of Christian theology. Arius, an Alexandrian priest and poet, preached that Jesus, though holy, is less than God, while Athanasius, a brilliant and violent bishop, saw any diminution of Jesus' godhead as the work of the devil. Between them stood Alexander, the powerful Bishop of Alexandria, in search of a solution that would keep the empire united and the Christian faith alive.

View attachment 1014

Here's another one. Two different books...

How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee is a book by American New Testament scholar Bart D. Ehrman. Published on March 25, 2014, by Harper One, the book contends that the historical Jesus did not claim to be divine, nor was he worshipped as such during his life; rather, his status as God the Son in the Trinity in Christian doctrine developed in the years following his crucifixion.[1][2]

Overview​

In How Jesus Became God, Ehrman argues that the historical Jesus did not claim divinity and was not worshipped as divine during his lifetime. Instead, the belief in Jesus as divine arose shortly after his crucifixion, and that the belief in Jesus as God the Son, an incarnation of God and the second divine person (or "prosopon") in the Trinity in Christian doctrine, developed in the following centuries.[1][2][3]

View attachment 1015

Nothing there about roman Catholicism in those early years I quoted

And Jesus was in fact worshipped and accept worship

Luke 24:52–53 (KJV 1900) — 52 And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy: 53 And were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen.

Matthew 28:17 (KJV 1900) — 17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.

John 9:38 (KJV 1900) — 38 And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.

Maybe you should just forget letting men may tickle your ears and believe scripture

 

[TomL]

The Lamb is standing in the midst of the throne as He is in the midst of the four beasts and in the midst of the elders.
For this reason...
The Lamb is not an elder, even if he is seen in standing the midst of the elders.
The Lamb is not a beast, even if he is seen standing in the midst of the beasts
The Lamb is not God, even if he is seen standing in the midst of the throne.

None of which was the purpose of the quotes

Nowhere in this vision the Lamb sits in the throne of God, which is a different metaphor.
That's why the Lamb can move from where he is, and take the scroll from the Person who sits on the throne:
"The Lamb had seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth. He went and took the scroll from the right hand of him who sat on the throne."

As you see, this verse would make no sense if the Lamb were sitting with God in the same throne.

Again you conflate the purpose of the quote which was to merely note the lamb is said to sit on the Fathers throne

As you can see, the author separates "God" from "Lamb".

• If that Lamb is Jesus,... Who is that God?
• If the Lamb is God, why does the author have to say "God" and "Lamb" separately? If the author were Trinitarian, he could have said "Father" and "Lamb" without commiting to "God", as God is triune. Why, then, to separate God from Lamb?
• If the author wants to tell us that two persons sit in the throne, why do five verses say that only One Person sits in the throne?
• If the author wants to tell us that the Lamb also sits in the throne why Rev 7:10 says "Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.” ?

Again, no one thinks the lamb is the father.

If you were a trinitarian, you should know that.