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 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 无罪 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.

Woohoo .. maybe we should organize outing there!

BERLIN (AFP) - - If you ever fancied lunch in the Tower of Babel, visiting an "original size" Noah's Ark or a multimedia depiction of the final battle between Good and Evil, you may not have long to wait.

Under plans announced by a group of Swiss evangelical Christians and reported by the German press on Wednesday, Genesis Park, a theme park based on the Bible, will open at a yet to be chosen site in Germany by 2012.

It will group some 40 attractions over an area the size of 70 football pitches encompassing all areas of the Christian story, according to the organisers' website.

The centrepiece will be what the organisers call an "original size" Noah's Ark which is 150 metres (490 feet) long and surrounded by water.

Other attractions will include two roller coasters -- one giving an idea of the Great Flood and another on the theme of heaven and hell -- a miniature version of Biblical-era Israel and a Roman amphitheatre.

Visitors will be served food at the City of Enoch, a Tower of Babel panorama restaurant, an Old Testament-era desert tent, and a mock-up of Jerusalem at the time of Jesus -- also the location for the main shopping mall.

"We would like to transmit the story and the message of the Bible in an active and exciting way, so that many people in our society may have the opportunity to experience up close the most wonderful and fantastic love story of all, the love story of our Creator and Jesus Christ," the website said.

The project is well short of the necessary 120 million euros (185 million dollars), but organisers are talking with German investors and hope to raise enough by the end of the year, according to the Frankfurter Rundschau daily.

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."

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 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 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 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 domonkassyu:

when God created the perfect humans,he saw that it was good and said it was good. so in the same light, when they sinned, they became no good isnt it?

wah leow eh .. perfect human .. sounds so much like the Gospel of Judas siah!

For it is written,

".. Let any one of you who is strong enough among human beings bring out the perfect human and stand before my face."

They all said, "We have the strength."

But their spirits did not dare to stand before him, except for Judas Iscariot.

Originally posted by domonkassyu:

nono..nv change..she was still perfect/good..but when she decided to sin..den no good/imperfect.

lol .. is this another fallacy of equivocation? now perfect and good the same liao.

Originally posted by domonkassyu:

if God says good sure good one. we still have God's image. but we are not perfect. imagine photocopying an original with a lousy copy machine??

lol .. initially you agreed to M&P's perfect woman .. now you change liao?

Originally posted by domonkassyu:

actually i believe its when she has the thought to try it out thats when sin came. den when adam chose to die with her. JC did says that having the thought oso sin liaoz

 

Then sin will eventually come.

Anytime their thought veer away from God's standard, sin will come. Fruit or no fruit, sin will come, to them or their descendants. Just a matter of when only.

Originally posted by Miracles&Prophecies:

They were both indeed perfect(sharing the image of God). Eve took the bite not out of imperfection but out of disobedient. Remember free will? So it was more like rebellion than imperfection. She thought she knew better. Sounds familiar with even today's people?

Btw, the bible did not use perfect, it uses good. :P

Furthermore, it can be argued we still have the image of God in us now. So are we still "perfect"?

Originally posted by domonkassyu:

yep..like what M&P states, shes a perfect woman then. only when she decided to listen to the "snake" did she becomes sinful(falling short of God's standard).

Wait a minute.

Did the sin occur before or after the bite?

Originally posted by domonkassyu:

how he died fo sins of man is simple.how did sin 1st step in?? satan lied through snakey."snakey" lied to eve(perfect).eve(perfect) told adam(perfect) about it.both(perfect) took a bite.no longer perfect and sin comes with good ol death

Not sure of your debate with 24/7, but I just want to comment:

When Snakey lied to Eve, was Eve perfect then? If she was perfect, why did she take the bite?

Just something to ponder.

My friend, 24/7:

You seem to make the same logical fallacy .. that absence of evidence implies evidence of absence.

Originally posted by dumbdumb!:

in the end it all boils down to whether it's just plain ti-ki-ness or not. =x haha

 you can't ignore this phrase "The Word is God" when it's.. like, right there?

Neither should you ignore what's originally written in the Greek.

The word is 'theos' .. and it means many other things beside Hashem.

Originally posted by 24/7:

 

Icemoon:

You've answered yourself and those who ask why Jesus doesnt come out right and declare, "Hey world! I'm God, come get me!"

If he doesnt grab the bull by the horns, im sure you'll know why. To people, this verse and others clearly indicate that He's claiming equality to God.

 

Did people worship Him in the book of John? Certainly, Icemoon! But im sure you'll say thats not evidence of His deity.

Did he correct Thomas when he exclaimed, "My Lord and my God!" Nope, he didnt. You know how Jews are not supposed to take the name of God in vain, so to say Thomas exclaimed that in surprise is groundless. Jesus went on to bless him.

Your statements are sweeping. And your argument is pretty much recycled. :P

For example, you mentioned about Thomas invoking the name of God. But are we sure Thomas is invoking the name of God whom we know as Hashem? If you check the Greek, the words are Kyrios and Theos. None of them is a one to one mapping for Hashem!

The above illustrates just one problem of Hebrew-Greek-English translation.

Interesting you quoted John 9. I wonder have you checked Strongs or done your homework before quoting it?

The Greek word for 'worship' in John 9 is proskuneo. Before we continue, do you want to bet your last cent that 'worship' in the NT is always proskuneo? Never mind the context even.

If you are afraid to bet your last cent, smart ass. At least you aren't thinking like a simpleton!

Because there is another Greek word for 'worship', called latreuo. Heh.

Let me quote from Strongs:

http://www.eliyah.com/cgi-bin/strongs.cgi?file=greeklexicon&isindex=3000

3000. latreuo lat-ryoo'-o from latris (a hired menial); to minister (to God), i.e. render religious homage:--serve, do the service, worship(-per).

http://www.eliyah.com/cgi-bin/strongs.cgi?file=greeklexicon&isindex=4352

4352. proskuneo pros-koo-neh'-o from 4314 and a probable derivative of 2965 (meaning to kiss, like a dog licking his master's hand); to fawn or crouch to, i.e. (literally or figuratively) prostrate oneself in homage (do reverence to, adore):--worship.

The Lexicon listings are quite long, so I leave you to read yourself:
http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?strongs=4352&t=KJV&page=1
http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3000&t=KJV

Suffice to say, when worship is used in reference to Jesus, latreuo is never used! When there is a clear reference to Hashem, latreuo is used. See the pattern?

I shall not say much. Read, discern and be skeptical. :P

Yes!

I wish to thank you guys who have contributed one way or another to the rating. Good job.

By the way, I hope you guys know what you are doing. A few of you are testy of late. Let there be flame but none of you should be consumed.

Fair enough.

Originally posted by Catknight:

Any Hakkas here, what is your thoughts on this?Could ancient hakkas have blood ties with Yamato people?

Hakkas are a migratory people. Any blood links would have been diluted liao.

Originally posted by Catknight:

Rish u study japanese any similiarities btwn hakka dialect and japanese?

Hakka is similar to mandarin and cantonese.

liddat japanese also similar to mandarin and cantonese?

say what?