Originally posted by 24/7:You've not made any case.
Just because latreuo is used of God and not Jesus - whats your point?
By the way, you're wrong to say worship was never used to refer to Jesus. In Rev 22:3, Christ is latreuo along with God, referred as a singular pronoun and on the throne. Does that give u a clearer picture of the Trinity?
I have made my case.
My point is that considering there are different Greek words for 'worship', it is premature to assert any worship of Jesus as worshipping Hashem.
Indeed, Rev 22:3 did not claim Christ is latreuo along with God. Read carefully. I quote you my NRSV:
22Then the angel* showed me the river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2through the middle of the street of the city. On either side of the river is the tree of life* with its twelve kinds of fruit, producing its fruit each month; and the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. 3Nothing accursed will be found there any more. But the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his servants* will worship him; 4they will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. 5And there will be no more night; they need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be their light, and they will reign for ever and ever.
It seems to me the throne of God is somehow shared with the throne of the Lamb. Honestly, I'm not sure how this works out in reality, maybe God is together with the Lamb, like stroking the cheshire cat .. haah.
Edit: so if the fellows in Alice in Wonderland prostrate in front of the Queen (with the cheshire cat sitting on her lap), you cannot say they are worshipping the cat right?
Nontheless, it is clear that the "him" worshipped is God. Don't say I use modern analogy like the cheshire cat on the throne to refute the possibility of the Trinity, I can refute based on simple analysis alone.
The key is "his servants will worship him". A few verses later, the pattern is repeated:
6 And he said to me, ‘These words are trustworthy and true, for the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, has sent his angel to show his servants* what must soon take place.’
From above, it is clear that the servants are those belonging to the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, basically Hashem lah.
The Trinity is not even implied, 'cos in the next verse, we hear Jesus speaking:
7 ‘See, I am coming soon! Blessed is the one who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book.’
Edit: paiseh, I just realized the 'he' in verse 6 is also Jesus! Wah .. now my case becomes stronger .. lol
In no way is Jesus is saying that he is the Lord of verse 6! You can bring in your pre-conception of the Trinity and twist the verse to suit your interpretation, but this cannot convince us.
Originally posted by 24/7:We looked at the context and especially the use of the phrase "falling down and worshipping." It seems hard to escape the conclusion that Jesus is being worshipped.
Erm, I never say Jesus is not being worshipped.
Rather, my point is the proskeuno of Jesus does not imply the latreuo of Hashem!
Your case is very much weakened because never once is Jesus "latreuo-ed" directly. In fact, Thomas did not latreuo Jesus when he exclaimed "My Lord and My God".
Thus, it is difficult to tell when we see proskeuno, whether the believer is worshipping Hashem or a being that happens to be superior in rank to them.
In the case of Cornelius, it should be the latter because Cornelius already knew, via the vision from the angel, about Peter before the meeting. Or perhaps, as a God-fearing gentile, he did not yet understand true worship (the kind reserved to Hashem alone). Which was why Peter corrected him. Makes sense?
In the case of John in Revelations, it cannot be that this lao jiao last-surviving Apostle cannot tell God apart from angels. He should know that true worship is reserved for God alone. But he was no doubt overwhelmed, after being showed the Word of God. But this doesn't mean he worshipped the angel in the same way that he would worship God.
In summary, the above two cases do not support the argument that proskuneo refers to the true worship of God.
Originally posted by domonkassyu:seen such bodies before, some even have oils coming out of the body that release a sweet smell. some RC believers says the oil can be used to heal and such. but the way u put it, corrupt, do u mean rot?
Yes corrupt meaning rotting.
Originally posted by Icemoon:
Erm, I never say Jesus is not being worshipped.Rather, my point is the proskeuno of Jesus does not imply the latreuo of Hashem!
Your case is very much weakened because never once is Jesus "latreuo-ed" directly. In fact, Thomas did not latreuo Jesus when he exclaimed "My Lord and My God".
Thus, it is difficult to tell when we see proskeuno, whether the believer is worshipping Hashem or a being that happens to be superior in rank to them.
In the case of Cornelius, it should be the latter because Cornelius already knew, via the vision from the angel, about Peter before the meeting. Or perhaps, as a God-fearing gentile, he did not yet understand true worship (the kind reserved to Hashem alone). Which was why Peter corrected him. Makes sense?
In the case of John in Revelations, it cannot be that this lao jiao last-surviving Apostle cannot tell God apart from angels. He should know that true worship is reserved for God alone. But he was no doubt overwhelmed, after being showed the Word of God. But this doesn't mean he worshipped the angel in the same way that he would worship God.
In summary, the above two cases do not support the argument that proskuneo refers to the true worship of God.
You are saying that worshipping Jesus is not the true worship of God isn't it?
Well basically whoever worship other than God is considered blasphemy.
Then basically you are saying that Jesus is not God but rather just another superior being.
That would conclude that all Christians are heretics LOL and damned for being blasphemous.
Take Padre Pio example or St. Bernadette whose body doesn't rot for hundred of years. Doesn't that tell something? They put their faith squarely on Jesus. St Bernadette had a devotion to St. Mary mother of Jesus if you will but just look at their body....it looks as if they were only sleeping all this time. What's the logic of that unless they have been graced by God and that their life and their faith to Jesus was not against God. But you could cry the trick of the devil LOL. Sounds like many people believe more in the power of the devil than of God.
How many people have been cured for believing in Jesus? Read the Christians testimonial book.
As for my experience, my cry of help to God made the evil spirit (called Olazhong LOL) which tried to possess me fled. Now I am a Christian and if my faith doesn't please God why did God answer my cry of help?
I too had asked God for thing that was beyond possibility and was granted in an instant. But always somebody would cry coincidence but before that they would tell me I'm crazy LOL.
Jesus once said that no one shall get to God unless through Him and when I was given love of Jesus my request to be shown the face of Jesus was granted in that instant and I saw the glory of God not a mere angel nor human.
Unless God Himself is pleased with putting faith through Jesus, Jesus would not be able to do what he did and the people who put their faith in Him would not experience God's grace.
Did God ever let anyone worship other than Himself? Now God works through people who believe in Jesus and that tells that Jesus is not other than Himself. Putting faith and worshipping Jesus doesn't offend God and makes its believers blasphemous. In fact it is easier to get to God(experiencing God's grace) through Jesus.
“Yours, O LORD, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the majesty and the splendor, for everything in heaven and earth is yours. Yours, O LORD, is the kingdom; you are exalted as head over all.”- 1 Chronicles 29:11
no matter how i look..though there maybe diff words used for worships, all the texts clearly pointed out worship is done to God(father) only. all other examples of worship performed to angels and such were seriously warned against. the throne of God and of the lamb simple to understand. picture this. a throne in the room for the high king. a lesser throne for JC at the side.
Originally posted by domonkassyu:no matter how i look..though there maybe diff words used for worships, all the texts clearly pointed out worship is done to God(father) only. all other examples of worship performed to angels and such were seriously warned against. the throne of God and of the lamb simple to understand. picture this. a throne in the room for the high king. a lesser throne for JC at the side.
hmm, actually, worship is done to God only. at least, that's what we believe. that there is only 1 God. manifested in 3 persons yes, but there is only 1 God.
Originally posted by Miracles&Prophecies:You are saying that worshipping Jesus is not the true worship of God isn't it?
Well basically whoever worship other than God is considered blasphemy.
Then basically you are saying that Jesus is not God but rather just another superior being.
That would conclude that all Christians are heretics LOL and damned for being blasphemous.
If you say whoever worship other than God is blasphemy, then Apostle John in Revelations 该当何罪？
Cornelius we can close one eye, but John?? As one who has seen the death and resurrection of Jesus and the visions in Revelations, you mean he cannot tell God apart from angels? And when he 'worships' the angel, it is the same kind of worship that is reserved for God?
Originally posted by Icemoon:If you say whoever worship other than God is blasphemy, then Apostle John in Revelations 该当何罪？
Cornelius we can close one eye, but John?? As one who has seen the death and resurrection of Jesus and the visions in Revelations, you mean he cannot tell God apart from angels? And when he 'worships' the angel, it is the same kind of worship that is reserved for God?
woo, this is interesting, where?
Originally posted by dumbdumb!:hmm, actually, worship is done to God only. at least, that's what we believe. that there is only 1 God. manifested in 3 persons yes, but there is only 1 God.
That's right. Technically nobody worships Jesus, who is your mediator to God.
What everybody, Catholic or Protestant, does is worship God.
That Jesus has to be God is argument by necessity, which is why there was such a huge debate during the early centuries about the nature of Christ.
Originally posted by dumbdumb!:woo, this is interesting, where?
I quote 24/7's reply below.
There is a type of proskuneo that cannot be mistaken for mere courtesy. In Acts 10:25 Cornelius fell at Peter's feet and proskuneo ("worshipped") him. In Revelation 19:10 and 22:8 John fell at the angel's feet twice and proskuneo ("worshipped") him. Both Cornelius and John were seriously reprimanded. Why?
The reason they were reprimanded is that proskuneo is generally translated to bow down but if a person is already down, the addition of proskuneo must indicate worship. Cornelius didn't fall at Peter's feet and then bow down, he was already down. John didn't fall down at the angel's feet and then bow down, he was already down. They both fell down and worshipped. Ergo the strong words of correction: "Worship God, not me."
okay..so basically christians worships the father. believes the son and filled with the HS.and they say all 3 are actually the same person. but being treated very differently.
many men of faith have been recorded as falling down and worshipping the angels. john who has seen the son knows he is not just any angels but the most high. so by right,when he sees lesser angels, he would be thinkin" heck, just another angel, as if i never seen the most high before". however, the manifestation of a spirit being must be very overwhelming that mere men cannot tahan but felt the urge to bow to it. therefore so many men of faith was advised by the angels not to sin against God in this manner.
as for corpses that dont rot, there were scientific explanations. worldwide there are many corpses that dun rot. many are not christains, much less to say so called "saints".. then how to explain?
Originally posted by Icemoon:If you say whoever worship other than God is blasphemy, then Apostle John in Revelations 该当何罪？
Cornelius we can close one eye, but John?? As one who has seen the death and resurrection of Jesus and the visions in Revelations, you mean he cannot tell God apart from angels? And when he 'worships' the angel, it is the same kind of worship that is reserved for God?
Read revelation1: 9-20. He bowed before Jesus the alpha and omega.
There are some instace when a deeply religious man tried to worship an angel when they see one which is an understandable behavior because they feel overhwhelmed such as in the story of Tobit but the angel prevented that. However I never read that John worshipped an angel..
Originally posted by domonkassyu:
as for corpses that dont rot, there were scientific explanations. worldwide there are many corpses that dun rot. many are not christains, much less to say so called "saints".. then how to explain?
It's not just not rotting. I believe there is no medical explanation of this. The state of preservation is so perfect that it is medically impossible. Scientifically not logical too.
Even the hairs on the faces are still intact
If there are others whose body doesn't become corrupted at all enlighten us please(with pictures) so your sentence carry weight. Otherwise it's a lie. At most it is a myth.
Originally posted by Miracles&Prophecies:It's not just not rotting. I believe there is no medical explanation of this. The state of preservation is so perfect that it is medically impossible. Scientifically not logical too.
Even the hairs on the faces are still intact
If there are others whose body doesn't become corrupted at all enlighten us please(with pictures) so your sentence carry weight. Otherwise it's a lie. At most it is a myth.
ever saw in malaysian news paper article..photos from that newspaper impossible to scan now. used for clearing my dog shit liaoz.but i will try to find from the net if there are any such incidents.as for the medical explanation, u mentioned u believe none such explanation, how certain are u? if not also just a myth at most wor..
Originally posted by Miracles&Prophecies:Read revelation1: 9-20. He bowed before Jesus the alpha and omega.
There are some instace when a deeply religious man tried to worship an angel when they see one which is an understandable behavior because they feel overhwhelmed such as in the story of Tobit but the angel prevented that. However I never read that John worshipped an angel..
John almost? did worship the angel, but was stopped of course.
Read 24/7's take on the issue:
There is a type of proskuneo that cannot be mistaken for mere courtesy. In Acts 10:25 Cornelius fell at Peter's feet and proskuneo ("worshipped") him. In Revelation 19:10 and 22:8 John fell at the angel's feet twice and proskuneo ("worshipped") him. Both Cornelius and John were seriously reprimanded. Why?
The reason they were reprimanded is that proskuneo is generally translated to bow down but if a person is already down, the addition of proskuneo must indicate worship. Cornelius didn't fall at Peter's feet and then bow down, he was already down. John didn't fall down at the angel's feet and then bow down, he was already down. They both fell down and worshipped. Ergo the strong words of correction: "Worship God, not me."
If only God can receive worship, then John 该当何罪？
Of course, John is æ— ç½ª if he did not worship the angel like the angel is God.
Read up on the two Greek words that translate to 'worship'. Got difference one! But subtle.
I'm very certain that there is no logical explanation domonkassyu. At least not in such a perfect condition. Somebody should check Padre Pio's eyes and see whether they are still in perfect condition. I bet they are! Check the tounge also! The gum, etc
Hmm just curious how long has the person been dead in that Malaysian paper. Was it a he or a she? Was he or she religious? ever thought of it as scam news from cheap papers? people lie all the time. Well especially those in power.
Originally posted by Icemoon:
John almost? did worship the angel, but was stopped of course.Read 24/7's take on the issue:
If only God can receive worship, then John 该当何罪？
Of course, John is æ— ç½ª if he did not worship the angel like the angel is God.
Read up on the two Greek words that translate to 'worship'. Got difference one! But subtle.
Like you said he was stopped so he never worshipped the angel.
To Icemoon:
Misrepresentations. Puerile comments. Insults. Strawman arguments. Always thought you're better than this. Seems not.
It seems to me the throne of God is somehow shared with the throne of the Lamb. Honestly, I'm not sure how this works out in reality, maybe God is together with the Lamb, like stroking the cheshire cat .. haah.
Great. Now ur contradicting urself.
Is God and the Lamb on the throne? Yes
Is God being Latreuo? Yes
Is the Lamb still with God when God was Latreuo? Yes
You claimed that only God can be Latreuo, so when the Lamb is on the throne, isn’t the Lamb receiving the same Latreuo? If the Lamb wasn’t meant to receive the same Latreuo, shouldn’t God ask Him to leave first? Or to use your irreverent example, to put him down before receiving Latreuo?
Edit: paiseh, I just realized the 'he' in verse 6 is also Jesus! Wah .. now my case becomes stronger .. lol
In no way is Jesus is saying that he is the Lord of verse 6! You can bring in your pre-conception of the Trinity and twist the verse to suit your interpretation, but this cannot convince us.
Thank u for bringing this up.
Still on NRSV:
Rev 22:6 → And he said to me, "These words are faithful and true"; and the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent His angel to show to His bond-servants the things which must soon take place.
Who’s the ‘he’? Read in context all the way to Rev 21:9, where this whole epilogue started. It was one of the seven angels.
Rev 21:9 → Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, "Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb."
Who sent the angel? Jesus Christ.
Rev 1:1 → The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John,
Back to Rev 22:6, who did the angel say sent him? The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets.
Go figure.
Erm, I never say Jesus is not being worshipped.
Rather, my point is the proskeuno of Jesus does not imply the latreuo of Hashem!
Your case is very much weakened because never once is Jesus "latreuo-ed" directly. In fact, Thomas did not latreuo Jesus when he exclaimed "My Lord and My God".
You’re arguing against the dictionary.
Jesus wasn’t Latreuo because it is service-worship, service which pertains to worshipping God.
First, God wasn’t the only One who was latreuo. Twice is used of serving false gods (demons) (Ac. 7:42; Ro. 1:25). Just in case anyone has funny ideas that Latreuo is used exclusively for God.
It is used by the LXX translators to translate the following Hebrew terms:
a. `Avadh, “serve” (Dt. 10:12; Jos. 24:14 f.; 2 Kgs. 17:12).
b. Pelach , “serve” (Dn. 3:12; 6:16; 7:14-Aramaic)
c. Sharath, Piel: “minister, serve” (Nm. 16:9; Ez. 20:32).
In almost every case in the LXX, the verb latreuo translates the Hebrew verb `avadh, “to work, serve, perform the tasks of a servant or slave.”
Second, how does God want to be worshipped in the OT? -->
Exo 20:5, Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
bow down → shachah
serve → ‘abad
These 2 words translate from Septuagint as proskeuno and latreuo respectively.
1. So there’s nothing special about the use of latreuo.
2. When used, mostly used to translate ‘serve’. As in how the priest performs religious rites within a temple.
Question now is, so how does God want to be worshipped?
John 4:20-24 → 20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship (proskeuno). 21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh * , when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship (proskeuno) the Father. 22 Ye worship (proskeuno) ye know not what: we know what we worship (proskeuno): for salvation is of the Jews. 23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship (proskeuno) the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship (proskeuno) him. 24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship (proskeuno) him must worship (proskeuno) him in spirit and in truth
Matt 4:9-10 → And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship (proskeuno) me.
Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship (proskeuno) the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve (latreuo).
We’re required to do both. Worship (proskeuno) & serve (latreuo). Jesus uses parallelism, but mean the same thing - Dont mess with rulers, dont meddle with princes. Mess and meddle are the same. Proskeuno is the more proper word for worship in Greek.
In John 4:20-24 -- > 8 x proskeuno. God wants to be proskeuno. Mentioned 8 times in these 4 verses.
Matt 4:9-10 -- > Even Satan wanted this proskeuno worship from Jesus.
Does this give anyone an idea about what proskeuno really is? There’s nothing wrong with the rendering in the Bible!
As Icemoon affirmed, Jesus was proskeuno (worshipped)! Only God should be proskeuno. So who was Jesus then?
Originally posted by Miracles&Prophecies:I'm very certain that there is no logical explanation domonkassyu. At least not in such a perfect condition. Somebody should check Padre Pio's eyes and see whether they are still in perfect condition. I bet they are! Check the tounge also! The gum, etc
Hmm just curious how long has the person been dead in that Malaysian paper. Was it a he or a she? Was he or she religious? ever thought of it as scam news from cheap papers? people lie all the time. Well especially those in power.
wow..i like your 2nd paragraph, last line..from what i remembered from the news, it was a male.being the great great granpa of some family. a chinese. no idea if its religious or not.not stated.
btw icemoon, the way u fight the case of trinity with 24/7..was wondering if you believe in trinity or not..
Originally posted by 24/7:To Icemoon:
Great. Now ur contradicting urself.
Is God and the Lamb on the throne? Yes
Is God being Latreuo? Yes
Is the Lamb still with God when God was Latreuo? Yes
You claimed that only God can be Latreuo, so when the Lamb is on the throne, isn’t the Lamb receiving the same Latreuo? If the Lamb wasn’t meant to receive the same Latreuo, shouldn’t God ask Him to leave first? Or to use your irreverent example, to put him down before receiving Latreuo?
I did not contradict myself, friend.
In the first place, I said I don't know the reality the verse is trying to portray. By answering those questions with yes, you are the one setting up the strawman!
And I did use the analogy of the queen and her cheshire cat. If the queen were to sit on the throne with her cat on her lap and you prostrate in front of her, are you prostrating to her or her cat? Kaoz .. this is common sense isn't it? No-one will think that they are prostrating in front of the cat!
In fact, domonkassyu has another view:
the throne of God and of the lamb simple to understand. picture this. a throne in the room for the high king. a lesser throne for JC at the side.
Originally posted by Icemoon:I did not contradict myself, friend.
In the first place, I said I don't know the reality the verse is trying to portray. By answering those questions with yes, you are the one setting up the strawman!
And I did use the analogy of the queen and her cheshire cat. If the queen were to sit on the throne with her cat on her lap and you prostrate in front of her, are you prostrating to her or her cat? Kaoz .. this is common sense isn't it? No-one will think that they are prostrating in front of the cat!
In fact, domonkassyu has another view:
so do u stand for trinity or not??
Icemoon:
In the first place, I said I don't know the reality the verse is trying to portray. By answering those questions with yes, you are the one setting up the strawman!
Almost spilt my coffee when i read this....
Definition of strawman argument here.
Position X (mine): God and Jesus are latreuo on the throne.
Position Y (yours): "so if the fellows in Alice in Wonderland prostrate in front of the Queen (with the cheshire cat sitting on her lap), you cannot say they are worshipping the cat right?"
Get it?
I'm not sure if you think "i dont know" is a position, but answering those questions with yes was a simple way of presenting my case. If you think that's strawman argument, pls suggest how to present my case to you.
And I did use the analogy of the queen and her cheshire cat. If the queen were to sit on the throne with her cat on her lap and you prostrate in front of her, are you prostrating to her or her cat? Kaoz .. this is common sense isn't it? No-one will think that they are prostrating in front of the cat!
Using your irreverent example ... You and i know that God is not One who will share His glory. Furthermore, He is so particular about who we offer worship to, do you not think He will put the cat down first?
the throne of God and of the lamb simple to understand. picture this. a throne in the room for the high king. a lesser throne for JC at the side.
Rev 22:3 --> throne, not throne(s).
hur hur.. it's kinda.. weird to see how conversations work in forums. it's like.. EH got it's own discussion, 2 ppl arguing, then in chit chat also got another diff grp of ppl arguing.
hur hur.. it's kinda.. weird to see how conversations work in forums. it's like.. EH got it's own discussion, 2 ppl arguing, then in chit chat also got another diff grp of ppl arguing.
I'm not arguing. I've tried my best to be civil and just state what i observe.
But in the process, i've been labelled 'smart ass', 'simpleton', 'ridiculous' and had my arguments misrepresented and set up as strawmen. Personal insults right?