Biblical Proof Text of the Trinity: All Christian Apologists welcome to join.

[Daniel_Marsh]

“Since, then, in the case of those who are regenerate from death to eternal life, it is through the Holy Trinity that the life-giving power is bestowed on those who with faith are deemed worthy of the grace, and in like manner the grace is imperfect, if any one, whichever it be, of the names of the Holy Trinity be omitted in the saving baptism–for the sacrament of regeneration is not completed in the Son and the Father alone without the Spirit: nor is the perfect boon of life imparted to Baptism in the Father and the Spirit, if the name of the Son be suppressed: nor is the grace of that Resurrection accomplished in the Father and the Son, if the Spirit be left out :–for this reason we rest all our hope, and the persuasion of the salvation of our souls, upon the three Persons, recognized by these names; and we believe in the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is the Fountain of life, and in the Only-begotten Son of the Father, Who is the Author of life, as saith the Apostle, and in the Holy Spirit of God, concerning Whom the Lord hath spoken, 'It is the Spirit that quickeneth”. And since on us who have been redeemed from death the grace of immortality is bestowed, as we have said, through faith in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, guided by these we believe that nothing servile, nothing created, nothing unworthy of the majesty of the Father is to be associated in thought with the Holy Trinity; since, I say, our life is one which comes to us by faith in the Holy Trinity, taking its rise from the God of all, flowing through the Son, and working in us by the Holy Spirit. Having, then, this full assurance, we are baptized as we were commanded, and we believe as we are baptized, and we hold as we believe; so that with one accord our baptism, our faith, and our ascription of praise are to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost. But if any one makes mention of two or three Gods, or of three God-heads, let him be accursed. And if any, following the perversion of Arius, says that the Son or the Holy Spirit were produced from things that are not, let him be accursed. But as many as walk by the rule of truth and acknowledge the three Persons, devoutly recognized in Their several properties, and believe that there is one Godhead, one goodness, one rule, one authority and power, and neither make void the supremacy of the Sole-sovereignty, nor fall away into polytheism, nor confound the Persons, nor make up the Holy Trinity of heterogeneous and unlike elements, but in simplicity receive the doctrine of the faith, grounding all their hope of salvation upon the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,–these according to our judgment are of the same mind as we, and with them we also trust to have part in the Lord."
Gregory of Nyssa,To the City of Sebasteia,Epistle 2 (ante A.D. 394),in NPNF2,V:528-529

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

“All those Catholic expounders of the divine Scriptures, both Old and New, whom I have been able to read, who have written before me concerning the** Trinity**, Who is God, have purposed to teach, according to the Scriptures, this doctrine, that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit intimate a divine unity of one and the same substance in an indivisible equality; and therefore that they are not three Gods, but one God: although the Father hath begotten the Son, and so He who is the Father is not the Son; and the Son is begotten by the Father, and so He who is the Son is not the Father; and the Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son, but only the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, Himself also co-equal with the Father and the Son, and pertaining to the unity of the Trinity. Yet not that this Trinity was born of the Virgin Mary, and crucified under Pontius Pilate, andand roseburied, again the third day, and ascended into heaven, but only the Son. Nor, again, that this Trinity descended in the form of a dove upon Jesus when He was baptized; nor that, on the day of Pentecost, after the ascension of the Lord, when there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind,’ the same Trinity sat upon each of them with cloven tongues like as of fire,’ but only the Holy Spirit. Nor yet that this Trinity said from heaven, Thou art my Son,’ whether when He was baptized by John, or when the three disciples were with Him in the mount, or when the voice sounded, saying, I have both glorified it,and will glorify it again;’ but that it was a word of the Father only, spoken to the Son; although the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as they are indivisible, so work indivisibly. This is also my faith, since it is the Catholic faith.”
Augustine,On the Trinity,I:4,7(A.D. 416),in NPNF1,III:20

“But after him the schism of Sabellius burst forth out of reaction against the above mentioned heresy, and as he declared that there was no distinction between the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, he impiously confounded, as far as was possible, the Persons, and failed to distinguish the holy and ineffable** Trinity**. Next after him whom we have mentioned there followed the blasphemy of Arian perversity, which, in order to avoid the appearance of confounding the Sacred Persons, declared that there were different and dissimilar substances in the Trinity.”
John Cassian,The Incarnation of Christ,2(A.D. 430),in NPNF2,XI:551-552

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

“In God there is one substance, but three Persons; in Christ two substances, but one Person. In the** Trinity**, another and another Person, not another and another substance (distinct Persons, not distinct substances)…Because there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Ghost; but yet there is not another and another nature (distinct natures) but one and the same nature.”
Vincent of Lerins,Commonitory,37(ante A.D. 450),in NPNF2,XI:140

“But although, dearly-beloved, the actual form of the thing done was exceeding wonderful, and undoubtedly in that exultant chorus of all human languages the Majesty of the Holy Spirit was present, yet no one must think that His Divine substance appeared in what was seen with bodily eyes. For His Nature, which is invisible and shared in common with the Father and the Son, showed the character of His gift and work by the outward sign that pleased Him, but kept His essential property within His own Godhead: because human sight can no more perceive the Holy Ghost than it can the Father or the Son. For in the Divine Trinity nothing is unlike or unequal, and all that can be thought concerning Its substance admits of no diversity either in power or glory or eternity. And while in the property of each Person the Father is one, the Son is another, and the Holy Ghost is another, yet the Godhead is not distinct and different; for whilst the Son is the Only begotten of the Father, the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of the Father and the Son, not in the way that every creature is the creature of the Father and the Son, but as living and having power with Both, and eternally subsisting of That Which is the Father and the Son.”
Pope Leo the Great(regn 440-461),Sermon 77:2 (ante A.D. 461),in NPNF2,XII:190

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

“Or, if any one should perhaps think that this is done out of veneration for the supreme** Trinity**, neither so is there any objection to immersing the person to be baptized in the water once, since, there being one substance in three subsistences, it cannot be in any way reprehensible to immerse the infant in baptism either thrice or once, seeing that by three immersions the Trinity of persons, and in one the singleness of the Divinity may be denoted.”
Pope Gregory the Great(regn A.D. 590-604),To Leander Bishop of Hispalis,Letter 43(A.D. 591),in NPNF2,XII:88

cin.org/users/jgallegos/triune.htm

google.com/search?hl=en&q=trinity+church+fathers

note: some quotes left out to make it shorter, follow links for many many more church fathers quotes on Trinity, deity of Christ, Holy Spirit, etc.,

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Daniel writes:

I love this counter Trinity argument. .

You may want to study English grammar.

John 10:36
what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, 'I am God’s Son’?

John 11:4
When he heard this, Jesus said, “This sickness will not end in death. No, it is for God’s glory so that God’s Son may be glorified through it.”

Frankly, I will believe the translators of the NIV over the NWT, because I know that they are qualified and I know that those behind the NWT are not qualified.

google.com/search?hl=en&q=translators+new+world+translation+unqualified

And, the NWT agrees fully with Spiritualist translations of the NT. In fact the Watcher from time to time have even quoted a spiritualist to justifly their mistranslations of scripture.

google.com/search?hl=en&q=watchtowers+spiritualist

I have a copy of Greber’s NT and it is exactly concept by concept the NWT when it comes to passages about Jesus. Like in Col 1, Greber has “another” where the NWT has “other”, and neither another or other is even in the greek text.

How The Watchtower Relied On A Spiritualist Bible Translation
by Fr. Mitch Pacwa, S.J.
catholicculture.org/library/view.cfm?recnum=3740

Translators of the New World Translation
freeminds.org/history/NWTauthors.htm

True BIBLICAL greek scholars have a low view the NWT,

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

True BIBLICAL greek scholars have a low view the NWT,

Dr. J. R. Mantey (who is quoted on pages 1158-1159) of the Witnesses own Kingdom interlinear Translation):
“A shocking mistranslation.” “Obsolete and incorrect.” “It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 ‘The Word was a god.’”

Dr. Bruce M. Metzger of Princeton (Professor of New Testament Language and Literature):
“A frightful mistranslation.” “Erroneous” and “pernicious” “reprehensible” “If the Jehovah’s Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists.”

Dr. Samuel J. Mikolaski of Zurich, Switzerland:
“This anarthrous (used without the article) construction does not mean what the indefinite article ‘a’ means in English. It is monstrous to translate the phrase ‘the Word was a god.’”

Dr. Paul L. Kaufman of Portland, Oregon:
“The Jehovah’s Witnesses people evidence an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets of Greek grammar in their mistranslation of John 1:1.”

Dr. Charles L. Feinberg of La Mirada, California:
“I can assure you that the rendering which the Jehovah’s Witnesses give John 1:1 is not held by any repliablele Greek scholar.”

Dr. James L. Boyer of Winona Lake, Indiana:
“I have never heard of, or read of any Greek Scholar who would have agreed to the interpretation of this verse insisted upon by the Jehovah’s Witnesses…I have never encountered one of them who had any knowledge of the Greek language.”

Dr. Walter R. Martin (who did not teach Greek but has studied the language):
“The translation…‘a god’ instead of ‘God’ is erroneous and unsupported by any good Greek scholarship, ancient or contemporary and is a translation rejected by all recognized scholars of the Greek language may of whom are not even Christians, and cannot fairly be said to be biased in favor of the orthodox contention.”

Dr. William Barclay of the University of Glasgow, Scotland:
“The deliberate distortion of truth by this sect is seen in their New testament translations. John 1:1 is translated: ‘…the Word was a god,’ a translation which is grammatically impossible…It is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest.”

Dr. F. F. Bruce of the University of Manchester, England:
“Much is made by Arian amateur grammarians of the omission of the definite article with ‘God’ in the phrase ‘And the Word was God.’ Such an omission is common with nouns in a predicative construction…‘a god’ would be totally indefensible.” [Barclay and Bruce are generally regarded as Great Britain’s leading Greek scholars. Both have New Testament translations in print!]

Dr. Ernest C. Colwell of the University of Chicago:
“A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb…this statement cannot be regarded as strange in the prologue of the gospel which reaches its climax in the confession of Thomas. ‘My Lord and my God.’ - John 20:28”

Dr. Phillip B. Harner of Heidelberg College:
“The verb preceding an anarthrous predicate, would probably mean that the LOGOS was ‘a god’ or a divine being of some kind, belonging to the general category of THEOS but as a distinct being from HO THEOS. In the form that John actually uses, the word “THEOS” is places at the beginning for emphasis.”

Dr. J. Johnson of California State University, Long Beach:
“No justification whatsoever for translating THEOS EN HO LOGOS as ‘the Word was a god.’ There is no syntactical parallel to Acts 28:6 where there is a statement in indirect discourse; John 1:1 is direct…I am neither a Christian nor a trinitarian.”

Dr. Eugene A. Nida, head of Translations Department, American Bible Society:
“With regard to John 1:1, there is of course a complication simply because the New World Translation was apparently done by persons who did not take seriously the syntax of the Greek.” [Responsible for the Good News Bible - The committee worked under him.]

Dr. B. F. Wescott (whose Greek text - not the English part - is used in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation):
“The predicate (God) stands emphatically first, as in IV.24. It is necessarily without the article…No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form of expression, which simply affirms the true deity of the Word…in the third clause ‘the Word’ is declared to be ‘God’ and so included in the unity of the Godhead.”

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Dr. J. J. Griesbach (whose Greek text - not the English part - is used in the Emphatic Diaglott):
“So numerous and clear are the arguments and testimonies of Scriptures in favour of the true Deity of Christ, that I can hardly imagine how, upon the admission of the Divine authority of Scripture, and with regard to fair rules of interpretation, this doctrine can by any man be called in doubt. Especially the passage, John 1:1-3, is so clear and so superior to all exception, that by no daring efforts of either commentators or critics can it be snatched out of the hands of the defenders of the truth.”

Basically, your relying on Jason Beduhn is worth very little weight wise because he has not publically related to well known reliable biblical greek scholars. He shows a lack of mastery of the biblical literature of biblical sholars. **And, you assume that he is without personal bisas himself. ** Fact is, on col 1, he does not follow his own standards of unbias translation.

John Pacheco and Jason BeDuhn
On the NWT and John 1:1
forananswer.org/Top_JW/pacheco.beduhn.htm

Further, Dr. BeDuhn as a “non-theologian” may limit his familiarity with much relevant scholarship (see, for example, Dr. BeDuhn’s statement that he is unaware of who Murray J. Harris is, below).
digilander.libero.it/domingo7/protestanti.htm

** BeDuhn clearly shows his bias when endorsing the use of “[other]” in Colossians 1.** He would be correct that “[other]” is appropriate if Jesus is a created being. But he would be incorrect if Jesus is eternal. However, aside from his reference to the “firstborn” which—as we have seen above—could be either a statement of origin or supremecy, Paul does not tell us in this passage if Jesus is created or eternal.

**Therefore, by BeDuhn's guidelines for unbiased translation**], the translator must not include interpretation into the text.

Inserting “[other]” into the text removes the possibility that Jesus is eternal. It is therefore unmitigated interpretation rather than translation. Because Paul did not make this qualification, neither is the translator at liberty to do so.

Would we expect Paul to qualify this passage with his own "all other things" if Jesus was not eternal and the all was to be understood as hyperbole? As we saw above, BeDuhn says, "In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul catches himself saying that God will make all things subject to Christ. He stops and clarifies that "of course" when he says "all things" he doesn't mean that God himself will be subject to Christ, but all other things will be, with Christ himself subject to God." So apparently we could expect Paul to qualify a statement which had this magnitude of importance. However, contrary to the pattern 1 Corinthians 15 seems to suggest, BeDuhn uses this as an argument for permitting "[other]" in Colossians 1.

tetragrammaton.org/truthintrans.htm

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Daniel writes:

Listen Daniel… Phil 2 doesn’t use the phrase “God The Son”, in fact, that phrase isn’t used ANYWHERE in the Bible. Not once. You are reading into the Scripture what isn’t there.

Jesus calls himself “Son of God”, not “God The Son”. Take note and think about it…

Jesus did empty himself of what he had in heaven when he came to earth and became human.

At John 10:31-36, the Jews were angry, thinking that Jesus was making himself “God”… How did Jesus respond… He claimed only to be “God’s Son”…

Listen the Jesus, he’s telling you the truth.

**So, Steve’s Son is NOT the Son of Steve? Even English grammar is aganist your understanding. **

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Like mozart, I also would pick A. The belief found by the JW and other Non-Trinitarians proven to be false. While the those who held Trinitarian belief proven to be true. Mainstream Christianity show that one Jesus lived, suffered, died, and was buried and rose again on the third day.

From the Apostles there have been witnesses of miracles like Peter rising the dead, healing the sick. In the late of the 1st Century, 2nd Century, 3rd Century, 4th Century, early Christians were being persecuted and miracles bear witness to this belief.

St. Polycarp on his martyrdom, his enemies try to burn him but the flames did not harm him. So instead, a soldier came and stabb him and he was killed.

The martyrdom of Cecilia is said to have followed that of her husband and brother by the prefect Turcius Almachius.[5] The officers of the prefect then sought to have Cecilia killed as well. She arranged to have her home preserved as church before she was arrested. At that time, the officials attempted to kill her by locking her in an overheated bathhouse. However, the attempt failed, and she was to be beheaded. The executioner attempted to decapitate her three times unsuccessfully, at which time he fled. Cecilia survived another three days before succumbing. She died something around 176-180 AD.

Amen Manny, even the pagans when writing about christians understood that we believed that Jesus is God.

In one of the most famous (Letters, Book X, 96), he asks the Emperor about the way he ought to judge Christians, since he had always condemned those who did not deny Christianity and discharged those who offered the prescribed sacrifices to the Roman gods.

He said in his letter:

[According to them] their guilt or error was simply this - on a fixed day they used to meet before dawn and recite a hymn among themselves to Christ, as though he were a god. So far from binding themselves by oath to commit any crime, they swore to keep from theft, robbery, adultery, breach of faith, and not to deny any trust money deposited with them when called upon to deliver it. This ceremony over, they used to depart and meet again to take food - but it was of no special character, and entirely harmless. They also had ceased from this practice after the edict I issued - by which, in accord with your orders, I forbade all secret societies.

I then thought it the more needful to get at the facts behind their statements. Therefore I placed two women, called “deaconesses,” under torture, but I found only a debased superstition carried to great lengths, so I postponed my examination, and immediately consulted you.

crystalinks.com/pliny.html

The use of the word “a god” in Pliny’s letter was equating god to the supereme godhood of the roman rulers. One was given the choice to bow to Jesus or bow to the roman gods. Placing the meaning of “god” on equal terms with a divine being.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Manny,

For example, before you make a big claim about Jesus being “worshipped”, take the time to study the greek word “proskuneo”… the word used for what various people we doing to Jesus.

Check it out… do your research…

If you do, you will learn that Unger’s Bible Dictionary says that this word literally means to ‘kiss the hand of someone in token of reverence or to do homage.’ An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, by W. E. Vine, says that this word “denotes an act of reverence, whether paid to man ... or to God.” In Bible times pro·sky·ne′o often included literally bowing down before someone of high stature.

Consider the parable Jesus gave of the slave who was unable to repay a substantial sum of money to his master. A form of this Greek word appears in this parable, and in translating it the King James Version says that “the servant therefore fell down, and worshipped [form of pro·sky·ne′o] him [the king], saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all.” (Matthew 18:26; italics ours.) Was this man committing an idolatrous act? Not at all! He was merely expressing the kind of reverence and respect due the king, his master and superior.

Such acts of obeisance, or expressions of respect, were fairly common in the Orient of Bible times. Jacob bowed down seven times upon meeting his brother, Esau. (Genesis 33:3) Joseph’s brothers prostrated themselves, or did obeisance, before him in honor of his position at the Egyptian court. (Genesis 42:6) In this light we can better understand what happened when the astrologers found the young child Jesus, whom they recognized as “the one born king of the Jews.” As rendered in the King James Version, the account tells us that they “fell down, and worshipped [pro·sky·ne′o] him.”—Matthew 2:2, 11.

Clearly, then, the word pro·sky·ne′o, rendered “worship” in some Bible translations, is not reserved exclusively for the type of adoration due Jehovah God. It can also refer to the respect and honor shown to another person. In an effort to avoid any misunderstanding, some Bible translations render the word pro·sky·ne′o at Hebrews 1:6 as “pay him homage” (New Jerusalem Bible), “honour him” (The Complete Bible in Modern English), or “bow down before him” (Twentieth Century New Testament)

Jason DeBuhn’s “Truth In Translation” goes into this in great detail in chapter 4… This is a great book for the Bible student who’d really like to understand accuracy and bias in Bible Translations.

If you were to take the time and study this topic, you’d learn that bowing, and paying homage was a common act… this is the word “proskyneo”… choosing to use the word “worship” and the using that as a so-called “proof-text” that Jesus must be God is not correct.

So, based on this above you should have no problem with Catholics paying homage to Mary or to the Saints?

 

[BibleSteve]

Daniel writes:

So, Steve’s Son is NOT the Son of Steve? Even English grammar is aganist your understanding.

Of course Steve’s Son means the same thing as Son of Steve…

Just like God’s Son means the same thing as Son of God…

But it doesn’t mean “God The Son”… This is a made up term that is not used in the Bible…

Jesus was NEVER called “God the Son” in the Bible, which I use as a reference.

Where is your ability to reason here?

 

[BibleSteve]

Dear Daniel,

Thank for for posting a dozen+ copy/pasted quotes… the opinions of various non-inspired men. I think forum rules suggest providing the links to these articles…

I don’t hold these guys opinions higher than what Jesus himself said and the inspired writers of the Bible.

I know that you hold the ECF’s in great esteem as if whatever they said is more important than what Jesus said.

But, I don’t.

I look first to the words of Jesus, 2nd to the words of the inspired writers…

Everyone else gets a read… but ultimately, it’s what the Bible has to say on the topic.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Dear Manny and Daniel,

You’ve both brought up this point:

You must have missed the transitions in the book of revelation. Take the time sit down and outline the book. Starting with verse 1 which says basically the Father reveals to the Son who reveals to John.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Rev 22

10And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

11He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

12And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

**13I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. **
14Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

15For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

16I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

If you can’t figure it out, the one who is coming is JESUS, the one who is speaking in this text is JESUS.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Rev 21

6He said to me: “It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life. 7He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son. 8But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”

We know from the woman at the well it is Jesus who gives us “living water”.

John 4:10-13 (New International Version)

10Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.”

11"Sir," the woman said, “you have nothing to draw with and the well is deep. Where can you get this living water? 12Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did also his sons and his flocks and herds?”

13Jesus answered, "Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again,

Here Jesus claims to be living water,

John 7:37-39 (New International Version)

37On the last and greatest day of the Feast, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink. 38Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him.” 39By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.

Living water is associated with the Messiah,

Zechariah 14:8
On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half to the eastern sea and half to the western sea, in summer and in winter.

God is the spring of living water which we see from above is the person of the Holy Spirit ( Acts 13:2, holy spirit applies ego, the hallmark of personhood to himself. )

Jeremiah 2:13
"My people have committed two sins: They have forsaken me, the spring of living water, and have dug their own cisterns, broken cisterns that cannot hold water.

So, we know that Jesus is living water and God is living water.
Jesus is the first and the last, so is God.
Jesus is the alpha and omega, so is God.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

note: death is defined in James 2:26 contray to watchower theology. See also Rev 6.

Revelation 1

1The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, 2who testifies to everything he saw—that is, **the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. **3Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.

If you don’t get it, Revelation 1 is about Jesus too.

4John,
To the seven churches in the province of Asia:
Grace and peace to you from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits before his throne, 5and **from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. **
To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, 6and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father—to him be glory and power for ever and ever! Amen.
7Look, he is coming with the clouds,
and every eye will see him,
even those who pierced him;
and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen.

8"I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.”

Jesus is the one “who is to come”!!!

9I, John, your brother and companion in the suffering and kingdom and patient endurance that are ours in Jesus, was on the island of Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus. 10On the Lord’s Day I was in the Spirit, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet, 11which said: “Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea.”
12I turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands, 13and among the lampstands was someone “like a son of man,” dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest. 14His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire. 15His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. 16In his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.

17When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: **"Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. 18I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! **And I hold the keys of death and Hades.

Steve, Tell US when did God the Father die?

19"Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later. 20The mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand and of the seven golden lampstands is this: The seven stars are the angels[c] of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Steve, Rev 1 says,

17When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: "Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. 18I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.

Steve, Tell US when did God the Father die?

aside: Steve as a JW believes that all are asleep in death, whereas historically the christian church has always taught that we are alive and awake in heaven since the ressurrection of Jesus.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Steve, Rev 1 says,

17When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: "Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. 18I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.

Steve, Tell US when did God the Father die?

aside: Steve as a JW believes that all are asleep in death, whereas historically the christian church has always taught that we are alive and awake in heaven since the ressurrection of Jesus.

Daniel,

I quoted the same verse and still Steve doesn’t get it…

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, light from light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary
and became truly human.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father [and the Son],
who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Dear Manny,

Once again, you need to study the word you are using to prove your point.

Why does the Bible use the very same Greek word for “only-begotten” to describe the relationship of Isaac to Abraham?

Hebrews 11:17?

You do realise that Ishmael is also Abraham’s Son? And that he was begotten too? So, logically one can not say that Isaac was his “only begotten” ? One can say that Isaac was his “unique” son.

By faith Abraham hath offered up Isaac, being tried, and the only begotten he did offer up who did receive the promises,

Genesis 16:3-4

So after Abram had been living in Canaan ten years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian maidservant Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife. He slept with Hagar, and she conceived. When she knew she was pregnant, she began to despise her mistress.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

All due deference but your exegesis doesn’t add up BibleSteve. The entire passage refers to Jesus Christ who is the Alpha and Omega, the Lord God and who was “alive” (physically) and “died.”
Rev 1:12-18

"12Then I turned to see the voice that was speaking to me, and on turning I saw seven golden lampstands, 13* and in the midst of the lampstands one like a son of man, clothed with a long robe and with a golden girdle round his breast;
14 his head and his hair were white as white wool, white as snow; his eyes were like a flame of fire,

The term “Son of Man” is a term Jesus uses for His diety. Furthermore, when Jesus was asked by the high priest whether He was the “Son of God” in Matthew 26:63, Jesus responded with an affirmative, ergo declaring that He was the “Son of Man” who would come in power and great glory in verse 64. This indicates that Jesus used the phrase “Son of Man” to indicate His deity as the Son of God.

In Mt 26:65 the high priest tore his robe, because Jesus was saying He was God. As ancient Hebraism teaches, the Pharisees would tear their robes if someone spoke blasphemy.

15* his feet were like burnished bronze, refined as in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters; 16* in his right hand he held seven stars, from his mouth issued a sharp two-edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining in full strength. 17* When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand upon me, saying, "Fear not, I am the first and the last,
18 and the living one; I died, and behold I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.

Since to you only Jehovah is the first and last (Alpha and Omega), when did Jehovah, the living one die?

I am humbled.