Revelation 2:8

[Wootah]

8 “To the angel of the church in Smyrna write:

These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again.

Q: Who is the First and Last?
A: God.

If God is the first and last and also died and came to life again isn't that Jesus.

How does anyone get around this scriptural interpretation?

[101G]

8 “To the angel of the church in Smyrna write:

These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again.

Q: Who is the First and Last?
A: God.

If God is the first and last and also died and came to life again isn't that Jesus.

How does anyone get around this scriptural interpretation?

Yes, you're correct. and no one can get around it.

and you're correct on God, who is Jesus is the First and the Last,


Isaiah 44:6 "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God".

not only is he the First "AND" the Last, he's "ALSO" the First and the Last, the Same person, Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last.

but it gets even deeper, not only is he the First "AND" Last, or the First "ALSO" the Last, but he's the First "WITH" the Last, Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he.

I AM HE is a single designation, meaning only ONE PERSON.

That First "WITH" the Last is the same "WITH" in John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God".

the SAME ONE PERSON.

[marco]

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God".

He does not say: In the beginning was Jesus. Instead he tells us the word of God was always in existence (as we'd expect it to be.)

Jesus said he was the Truth - a metaphor. If he spread the word of God one could say that Jesus was the Word - a similar metaphor.

This interpretation avoids the nonsense of having Jesus existing with the dinosaurs, but not quite remembering it sufficiently to tell us. Instead he asserts he doesn't know some things: only the Father knows them, for he is just a human being spreading the word.

[101G]

[Replying to post 72 by marco]

First thanks for the reply, but it was Jesus who made all things including the dinosaurs.

and two, the name of God is JESUS. Matthew 1:21 "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Matthew 1:22 "Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,

Matthew 1:23 "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us".

if God be "with" us, then the NAME of God is Jesus.

[marco]

First thanks for the reply, but it was Jesus who made all things including the dinosaurs.

That would indeed be his crowning miracle.

and two, the name of God is JESUS. Matthew 1:21 "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

This does not in any way verify your claim. The prediction is that the child will become a good preacher, getting people to do good.

Matthew 1:23 "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us".

Whatever that prediction means it does not identify either Jesus or Jesus as a god. Jesus was never called Emmanuel so attaching the prophecy to him is not justified. In any event, prophecies are not in themselves truths.


You have made many asumptions to reach your conclusion that Jesus is God. The easiest way to discover if this is so is to search the Bible for the words: "I am God", spoken by Jesus. You will not find them so you have to rely on deductions. That is how the Trinity came into being - by human wish and extrapolation. Jesus may have been a good man; he wasn't God.

[onewithhim]

They had nothing to be afraid of.
They only wrote what they were meant to write. it was not up them,
it was not their wisdom. The Scriptures were inspired (by God).

Were this so there would be no debate, since all ambiguity would be inspirationally removed. But of course there are many areas much argued over, not to mention those areas that tell us to do ghastly things to sinners; areas which, thankfully, common sense now ignores.


Wouldn't it be ecumenically wonderful if we knew exactly what was meant by the famous words: "Do this in commemoration of me" ? (Luke 22:19)

We do know. Jesus was speaking to his Apostles and the core of the "little flock" (Luke 12:32) that would rule with him in heaven. He was making a covenant with them, involving the rulership over the earth after Armageddon. To commemorate that covenant, all those that will rule with him are to drink of the wine that represents his blood, and eat the unleavened bread that represents his body (that he gave up for them and mankind).

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 71 by 101G]

I see you haven't read the past posts. I have de-constructed the arguments you present. Please be so kind as to review the posts that have been submitted previously. Then the discussion can go on without having a lot of repetition. Thanks.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 72 by marco]

First thanks for the reply, but it was Jesus who made all things including the dinosaurs.

and two, the name of God is JESUS. Matthew 1:21 "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Matthew 1:22 "Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,

Matthew 1:23 "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us".

if God be "with" us, then the NAME of God is Jesus.

Am I the only one here who can see the error of your statement that "the name of God is JESUS"? Jesus spoke to his Father (Jehovah) and said to Him: "YOU are the only true God." (John 17:3) Before Jesus was born on Earth, the angel Gabriel said this to Mary:

"Look! you will conceive in your womb and give birth to a son and you are to call his name Jesus. This one will be great and will be called Son of the Most High, and God will give him the throne of David his father, and he will rule as king over the house of Jacob forever, and there will be no end to his kingdom." (Luke 1:31-33)

Obviously "Jesus" is not the name of God. He is the SON of God. God was to GIVE Jesus the throne of David, to rule over Jacob and the whole earth.

The King James Version tells us the name of God at PSALM 83:18:

"That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the Most High over all the earth."


That is the name of God, and was originally in the Hebrew text 7,000 times before men took it out and inserted "LORD" instead.

[101G]

[Replying to post 74 by marco]

First thanks for the response, but I must disagree with all of your assessment. and here's why

Isaiah 9:6 "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace".

#1. this child is called A. The mighty God. if you say that he is not the Mighty God, then you are not believing the scriptures, and are a none believer. B. this child is called the "EVERLASTING FATHER". notice "EVERLASTING" Father. C. this son is called Counsellor, or Comforter, as in the Spirit of Truth.

#2. this son is NOT "BORN", but GIVEN.

#3. only the Child is "BORN", which is flesh, but the Son is not Born, big difference.

I issue the same challenge as I did in the topic "Diversified Oneness". the Revelation 1:1 question, who sent "his" angel to John, and the angel himself tells us who sent him in Revelation 22:6.

so I ask you, who was it that sent his angel to John in Revelation 1:1 and in Revelation 22:6 the angel tell us who sent him?

so I'll be looking for your reply also.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 74 by marco]

First thanks for the response, but I must disagree with all of your assessment. and here's why

Isaiah 9:6 "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace".

#1. this child is called A. The mighty God. if you say that he is not the Mighty God, then you are not believing the scriptures, and are a none believer. B. this child is called the "EVERLASTING FATHER". notice "EVERLASTING" Father. C. this son is called Counsellor, or Comforter, as in the Spirit of Truth.

#2. this son is NOT "BORN", but GIVEN.

#3. only the Child is "BORN", which is flesh, but the Son is not Born, big difference.

I issue the same challenge as I did in the topic "Diversified Oneness". the Revelation 1:1 question, who sent "his" angel to John, and the angel himself tells us who sent him in Revelation 22:6.

so I ask you, who was it that sent his angel to John in Revelation 1:1 and in Revelation 22:6 the angel tell us who sent him?

so I'll be looking for your reply also.

I'm so sorry, friend, to have to disagree with you. As you learn more about the Scriptures and what they really are saying to us, you will see where you have misunderstood.

First of all, Jesus is referred to in Isaiah 9 as "mighty god." There are no capital letters in Hebrew, so "mighty god" doesn't necessarily mean THE one true God. Folks in Isaiah's day understood "god" to mean any powerful, influential person of authority. Jesus would be a "mighty god" without being God Almighty.

He is called "everlasting father" in the sense that he would give life to people, which a "father" is---a life-giver, is he not? Jesus is responsible for giving everlasting life to everyone who accepts his gift of the ransom. The Apostle Paul called himself a spiritual "father," because he led many people into the saving truth about Jesus. (See Philemon verse 10.)

Your point about the Son not being born escapes me.

You ask, "Who sent his angel to John?" That would be Jesus. But it was JEHOVAH, the God and Father of Jesus, that gave Jesus the revelation. Then Jesus presented John with the revelation through an angel. (Have you seen Revelation 3:12 where Jesus speaks of his God? Who would that be? Aha! Jesus has a God! He can't be God. Can you see?)

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 74 by marco]

First thanks for the response, but I must disagree with all of your assessment. and here's why

Isaiah 9:6 "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace".

#1. this child is called A. The mighty God. if you say that he is not the Mighty God, then you are not believing the scriptures, and are a none believer. B. this child is called the "EVERLASTING FATHER". notice "EVERLASTING" Father. C. this son is called Counsellor, or Comforter, as in the Spirit of Truth.

#2. this son is NOT "BORN", but GIVEN.

#3. only the Child is "BORN", which is flesh, but the Son is not Born, big difference.

I issue the same challenge as I did in the topic "Diversified Oneness". the Revelation 1:1 question, who sent "his" angel to John, and the angel himself tells us who sent him in Revelation 22:6.

so I ask you, who was it that sent his angel to John in Revelation 1:1 and in Revelation 22:6 the angel tell us who sent him?

so I'll be looking for your reply also.

Your bible version has been edited by copyists .

The original OT, the Tanakh, in Isaiah 9:5-6 says:

5 For a child has been born to us, a son has been given us.

And authority has settled on his shoulders.

He has been named "The Mighty God is planning grace;d

The Eternal Father, a peacable ruler"---

6 In token of abundant authority

and token of peace without limit

Upon David's throne and kingdom,

That it may be firmly established

In justice and in equity

Now and evermore.

The zeal of the Lord of Hosts

Shall bring this to pass.

d =As in 25:1

So you see it is a lot different in the original text.

Also, the hebrew word for angel (Malak) doesn't mean divine, it means messenger. Their divinity is established by their works.