What was the intent of the Author, the Holy Spirit?

[iamlamad]

Purposes of His incarnation

It is the mystery we can not fully comprehend. Jesus was/is 100% God and 100% man.

He Came to Reveal God to the World.—See John 1:14, 18; 3:1-36; 17:6, 26; 1 John 1:2; 4:9.

He Came to Bring God and Man Together.— See John 1:51 (compare Gen. 28:12); Matt. 1:23; 1 Peter 3:18.

He Came to Identify Himself With Man by Name.—He is called "Son of man" some seventy-seven times in the Gospels, such as in Luke 19:10.

He Came to Bear the Sins of Mankind.—See Isa. 53:6, 11; John 1:29, 1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 3:5.

He Came to Die in Our Stead.—See Isa. 53:5-10; Matt. 26:28; Acts 20:28; Rom. 4:25; 5:6-10; 1 Cor. 15:3; Gal. 1:4; 1 Tim. 2:6; Heb. 2:9; 1 Peter 1:18, 19; 2:24; 3:18.

He Came to Destroy the Devil and His Works.—See John 12:31; 16:33; Heb. 2:14; 1 John 3:8.

God in the form of a man ... but ... was/is and shall always be God.

Yes, He was/is the only way and how redemption became fully available (through Him) after Christ rose and re-entered into the heavenly sanctuary.

After His ascension into the heavenly sanctuary ...
Matthew 28

18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.

So, regarding the vision ... God or man?

What was seen? God in the form of a man.

1 John 3

2 Beloved, we are now children of God, and what we will be has not yet been revealed. We know that when Christ appears, we will be like Him, for we will see Him as He is.

A mystery.

Your list is good: What Jesus came to acomplish. I wish to add one more.

He Came so that SOMEONE would be qualified to open the seals and open the book - to the end that Satan could be disposed from his past as prince of this world. —See Rev. 4 & 7, then the 7th trumpet in chapter 11.

 

[Ken Rank]

I think "man" works well.

The question is to WHY God chose to show us a failed attempt to find someone who could open the book, and then later showed us a successful attempt.

My answer is, it shows the movement of time: there was a time when Jesus was not qualified to open the book, but after He rose from the dead He BECAME qualified - having become the redeemer of man. I think the whole purpose of chapters 4 & 5 were to set the context of the first seal, giving us the TIMING of this seal - around 32 AD.

It isn't a failed attempt... He is simply saying that certain things were sealed and nobody has shown themselves worthy to open it (because all have fallen short of the glory of God) save for the one who prevailed, which is Yeshua.

 

[iamlamad]

It isn't a failed attempt... He is simply saying that certain things were sealed and nobody has shown themselves worthy to open it (because all have fallen short of the glory of God) save for the one who prevailed, which is Yeshua.

I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.

This is a failed attempt at that point in time. John could have wept for days. Read it again: "no man was found." I am not talking about later: I am talking about this verse.

Yes, later Jesus was found. But WHY was John weeping? Why was it much?

 

[Ken Rank]

I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.

This is a failed attempt at that point in time. John could have wept for days. Read it again: "no man was found." I am not talking about later: I am talking about this verse.

Yes, later Jesus was found. But WHY was John weeping? Why was it much?

It says no man was found worthy... it doesn't say people kept trying and failing. No man was worthy because ALL HAVE SINNED AND FALLEN SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD. The only exception... the one born sinless, who died sinless, and who raised from the grave. He is worthy. I don't see what you see at all. It doesn't say man tried, it says man isn't even worthy to try!

 

[marineimaging]

There seems to be much disagreement as to the intent of the Author in many passages of Revelation. I would like to consider just one passage here:

Rev. 5
5:1 And I saw in the right hand of him who was seated on the throne a scroll written within and on the back, sealed with seven seals; 2 and I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, “Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?” 3 And no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or to look into it, 4 and I wept much that no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it.

One cannot just ignore this verse in favor of the next verse: God MUST have had a purpose for including this search that ended in failure.

Let's find every reasonable reason why or how this search ended in failure.

I have come to understand that we will be revealed to when it is time. Until then I am satisfied in my quaint and minute understanding of the Holy Spirit. What I do know, is that I would not be as happy today as I am without having understood that the Holy Spirit was left here for us to help us to lead us to guide us to walk with us. What a blessing. As for the Revelations - those will happen whether I understand or not so I don't kill myself in trying to cross every I or dot every t. Jesus Christ already did that for me a thousand times over.

 

[Blade]

There are those or the one that always knew. The Father as showing something. Christ was ALWAYS the only one aka GOD. Everything must always point ONLY to Him. I think we can get lost on a word. This "search" the Father always knew.. as did Christ. IF we run with "speculation" then you can go ANYWHERE with this to something that is not written. Like "if Jesus didnt rise from the dead" "if Adam and Eve HAD taken from the tree of life".. all that never happen.

HAHA the Father ALWAYS had all this "planned out" so to speak before the world was. Satan never got one over on Him. As one man talked about... out of all the ways this could have been done.. this is the only one where LOVE wins. The Fathers angels wonder at this..

 

[iamlamad]

It says no man was found worthy... it doesn't say people kept trying and failing. No man was worthy because ALL HAVE SINNED AND FALLEN SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD. The only exception... the one born sinless, who died sinless, and who raised from the grave. He is worthy. I don't see what you see at all. It doesn't say man tried, it says man isn't even worthy to try!

You are missing the entire point! The angel asked WHO IS WORTHY...and no man was found. That is what John wrote. It is the very reason He wept much: "no man was found."

But then LATER Jesus was found. The question then is WHY was Jesus not found before John wept much? Since John wrote "found" it seems to be a search in heaven, on earth and under the earth. But no one came forward as worthy, or no man was found. John weeping shows us that search ENDED in failure. it was LATER that Jesus was found.

The question still stands then: WHY was Jesus not found worthy before John wept?

Another question: COULD Jesus have been worthy to take the book and open the seals before He died? How about after He died, but before He rose?

 

[iamlamad]

There are those or the one that always knew. The Father as showing something. Christ was ALWAYS the only one aka GOD. Everything must always point ONLY to Him. I think we can get lost on a word. This "search" the Father always knew.. as did Christ. IF we run with "speculation" then you can go ANYWHERE with this to something that is not written. Like "if Jesus didnt rise from the dead" "if Adam and Eve HAD taken from the tree of life".. all that never happen.

HAHA the Father ALWAYS had all this "planned out" so to speak before the world was. Satan never got one over on Him. As one man talked about... out of all the ways this could have been done.. this is the only one where LOVE wins. The Fathers angels wonder at this..

No NO! We cannot speculate! We must follow what is written! OF COURSE it was all planned out, but that is not what we are discussing.

The vision makes the point: John wrote, "no man was found." If nothing was found, does not at least HINT that there was a search LOOKING for something? It seems the search was done in heaven, then on earth and then under the earth but "no man was found." I did not write it, JOHN wrote it. John weeping much indicates the search ended in failure. If you don't like the word "search," then just say that "no man was found" that answered the strong angel's call for "WHO..."

If we read ahead, we find that Jesus was found worthy to open the book - but that was LATER. In other words, God is showing us the movement of time.

Question: Could Jesus have been found worthy to open the book before He died?
How about after He died, but before He rose from the dead?

 

[Ken Rank]

You are missing the entire point! The angel asked WHO IS WORTHY...and no man was found. That is what John wrote. It is the very reason He wept much: "no man was found."

But then LATER Jesus was found. The question then is WHY was Jesus not found before John wept much? Since John wrote "found" it seems to be a search in heaven, on earth and under the earth. But no one came forward as worthy, or no man was found. John weeping shows us that search ENDED in failure. it was LATER that Jesus was found.

The question still stands then: WHY was Jesus not found worthy before John wept?

Another question: COULD Jesus have been worthy to take the book and open the seals before He died? How about after He died, but before He rose?

Studying any ancient document means allowing in true context. And true context isn't the verse before and after, it is ANYTHING that have influence on the text. So, in this case, "man" is inferred in the verse you are having trouble with. "Who is worthy"..... "no man was found worthy." But then, somebody who really isn't a man was found to be worthy. So... the "who is worthy" is really asking, "Who among all men is worthy?" None.... none are worthy. But... the Lamb of God, He is worthy because he has no sin.

 

[iamlamad]

Studying any ancient document means allowing in true context. And true context isn't the verse before and after, it is ANYTHING that have influence on the text. So, in this case, "man" is inferred in the verse you are having trouble with. "Who is worthy"..... "no man was found worthy." But then, somebody who really isn't a man was found to be worthy. So... the "who is worthy" is really asking, "Who among all men is worthy?" None.... none are worthy. But... the Lamb of God, He is worthy because he has no sin.

Are you then hinting that Jesus was not a man? I think you know that the Messiah HAD to be a man born of woman, else He would not qualify as the Messiah.

Next, was it because He had not sin alone, or could there be another reason? If it were living without sin, there would never had been a second search and John would not have had to weep much. I think there was something else that finally qualified Jesus to open the seals: I overcame death - rose from the dead. It is written that "He prevailed..." Yes, He prevailed over sin, overcoming every temptation. But finally, he prevailed over death. And then He was found worthy to take the book and open the seals.

In other words, He was NOT qualified to take the book before He rose from the dead. I believe this is what these two chapters are telling us.

You are right though: if that Angel had been shouting from the days of Adam's fall for someone worthy, "no man found" would have been the answer century after century until Jesus prevailed.

 

[Ken Rank]

Are you then hinting that Jesus was not a man? I think you know that the Messiah HAD to be a man born of woman, else He would not qualify as the Messiah.

Next, was it because He had not sin alone, or could there be another reason? If it were living without sin, there would never had been a second search and John would not have had to weep much. I think there was something else that finally qualified Jesus to open the seals: I overcame death - rose from the dead. It is written that "He prevailed..." Yes, He prevailed over sin, overcoming every temptation. But finally, he prevailed over death. And then He was found worthy to take the book and open the seals.

In other words, He was NOT qualified to take the book before He rose from the dead. I believe this is what these two chapters are telling us.

You are right though: if that Angel had been shouting from the days of Adam's fall for someone worthy, "no man found" would have been the answer century after century until Jesus prevailed.

He wasn't just a man... WE are son of man... He was the son of God. There is no issue with these verses, sorry you are having problems. I cannot help you.

 

[Alithis]

The question is WHY there was a search that ended in failure. You can't sidestep that verse in favor of the next verse. WHY did that first search end in failure?

I think its very obvious

 

[iamlamad]

He wasn't just a man... WE are son of man... He was the son of God. There is no issue with these verses, sorry you are having problems. I cannot help you.

Why do you imagine I have problems? Explain.

 

[iamlamad]

I think its very obvious

Explain.

 

[Ken Rank]

Why do you imagine I have problems? Explain.

The verse is very plain and simple and you are making it into something it is not. Let me try one more time, with a little more detail.

Revelation was written by a Hebrew who uses Hebraic thought, grammatical nuances, rules of exegesis (mostly in the case of Paul) and a manner of speaking that was common in THAT day in THAT area of the world... and it doesn't always align to our modern Western thought. That is important... we read through our Greek influenced Western eyes in English 1900 years after the fact. We can't read assuming they thought like we do. Studying to show ourselves approved means including all context, all that influences the book we are reading. And their Hebraic nature, their ancient near east lens that they saw the world through, has to at least be considered and weighed in so that we can better understand the author's intention. So....

Rev 5:2 And I saw a mighty angel who proclaimed with a great voice: Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof? (3) And no one was able, in heaven above, nor upon earth, nor under the earth, to open the book, or to inspect it. (4) And I wept much, because no one could be found who was worthy to open the book, or to inspect it.

The word "man" is not in the text... it just says, "no one was worthy." But the implication is man, and the implication is that while Yeshua was fully man, he is NOT part of this search for one who is worthy... at least initially. John looks and the angel proclaims that there is no man who is worthy to reverse the curse, open the book, perfect all of fallen creation. Because no MAN that was born from the seed of man is worthy. The one who is, wasn't born from the seed of man. And that is all you're dealing with here... there is none worthy of those who came from the seed of man because it is through man that sin is passed.

Hebrew people use context differently then we do. They can say a word, like Shema (we translate as "Hear") and by just using that one word, those who heard it knew he meant, "hear God and do as He directs." Why? Because in that culture, that is what shema meant. In this case, we KNOW Yeshua is worthy, and despite being God in the flesh, he was still 100% man. So either these verses contradict themselves (no man worthy... wait, here is a man) or the initial "no man worthy" was simply dealing with those born from man. Once the search through those born from man was concluded, and none were found... you expand your search to the one other in history who might be considered, and he is worthy because he was born without sin, died sinlessly, and was raised to walk again earning the right to open the book, perfect creation, and fully reverse the curse of sin and death introduced by the first Adam.

 

[iamlamad]

The verse is very plain and simple and you are making it into something it is not. Let me try one more time, with a little more detail.

Revelation was written by a Hebrew who uses Hebraic thought, grammatical nuances, rules of exegesis (mostly in the case of Paul) and a manner of speaking that was common in THAT day in THAT area of the world... and it doesn't always align to our modern Western thought. That is important... we read through our Greek influenced Western eyes in English 1900 years after the fact. We can't read assuming they thought like we do. Studying to show ourselves approved means including all context, all that influences the book we are reading. And their Hebraic nature, their ancient near east lens that they saw the world through, has to at least be considered and weighed in so that we can better understand the author's intention. So....

Rev 5:2 And I saw a mighty angel who proclaimed with a great voice: Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof? (3) And no one was able, in heaven above, nor upon earth, nor under the earth, to open the book, or to inspect it. (4) And I wept much, because no one could be found who was worthy to open the book, or to inspect it.

The word "man" is not in the text... it just says, "no one was worthy." But the implication is man, and the implication is that while Yeshua was fully man, he is NOT part of this search for one who is worthy... at least initially. John looks and the angel proclaims that there is no man who is worthy to reverse the curse, open the book, perfect all of fallen creation. Because no MAN that was born from the seed of man is worthy. The one who is, wasn't born from the seed of man. And that is all you're dealing with here... there is none worthy of those who came from the seed of man because it is through man that sin is passed.

Hebrew people use context differently then we do. They can say a word, like Shema (we translate as "Hear") and by just using that one word, those who heard it knew he meant, "hear God and do as He directs." Why? Because in that culture, that is what shema meant. In this case, we KNOW Yeshua is worthy, and despite being God in the flesh, he was still 100% man. So either these verses contradict themselves (no man worthy... wait, here is a man) or the initial "no man worthy" was simply dealing with those born from man. Once the search through those born from man was concluded, and none were found... you expand your search to the one other in history who might be considered, and he is worthy because he was born without sin, died sinlessly, and was raised to walk again earning the right to open the book, perfect creation, and fully reverse the curse of sin and death introduced by the first Adam.

The verse is very plain and simple and you are making it into something it is not. You will have to pick out a single verse and then show me where you imagine I went wrong.

The word "man" is not in the text... it just says, "no one was worthy." In fact, the KJV does use the word "man." If we read ahead, we see that Jesus prevailed to become worthy: It tells us He became the Redeemer and that is why He became worthy.

Questions: He was called "the Redeemer" in the Old Covenant: but when did He really BECOME "the redeemer?" Did it not first include a life without sin, then a willing death, then a resurrection from the Dead? For example, who had He "redeemed" before His death on the cross? Who was ever "born again" before His resurrection?

he is NOT part of this search for one who is worthy... at least initially. I think the angels was only looking for one worthy to open the seals - with no one particular in mind.In reading ahead it seems He knew the requirement would be the redeemer of mankind. John does not tell us, but it seems the requirement for one worthy is what was written on the outside of the scroll. Perhaps the angel did not know WHO or WHAT He was looking for: He just asked the question"WHO IS WORTHY..." Perhaps the angel is looking for someone to volunteer - someone to say "I am Worthy." We don't know for sure because John did not tell us. I think some "man" had to become the redeemer of mankind to become worthy to take the book and open the seals.

the angel proclaims that there is no man who is worthy I don't think so. I don't think the angel said anything further. Just John saw that no one was found, so wrote "no man was found."

Because no MAN that was born from the seed of man is worthy. This is a true statement but does not speak to this situation. The REASON "no man was found" is because Jesus had NOT YET risen from the dead. That is the point the Author is trying to show us. The point is the establish the timing of the first seal. This whole passage is more about TIMING than anything else. I am convinced God was showing John in a vision - the throne room while Jesus was under the earth - then when He rose from the dead - then when He ascended.

In other words, we need to ask ourselves WHY God should show a throne room with Jesus NOT seen at the right hand of God.

Why He would show the throne room with the Holy Spirit present.
Why He would show a time when "no man was found" and then show us a later time when Jesus was found? Then why show when Jesus suddenly appeared back in the throne room? It seems clear to me God is showing us TIMING and the movement of time.

(no man worthy... wait, here is a man) I am convinced this is ONLY to show time and the movement of time. At that moment in time Jesus had not yet risen from the dead to BECOME worthy.

"no man worthy" was simply dealing with those born from man. The one worthy would have to be the redeemer. ONLY Jesus could fulfill that - but ONLY after He rose from the dead. Paul wrote that if Jesus did not rise, we are still in our sins. Paul's gospel CERTAINLY included he resurrection of Christ. You are thinking "qualifications" while I think the Author was thinking of TIME.

 

[Ken Rank]

The verse is very plain and simple and you are making it into something it is not. You will have to pick out a single verse and then show me where you imagine I went wrong.

You said...

The question is WHY there was a search that ended in failure. You can't sidestep that verse in favor of the next verse. WHY did that first search end in failure?

You've had an issue the entire time over why nobody was found worthy in one verse, and then was in the next. I have explained it to you as best I can, sorry... I can't do better. There was none worthy among those born of man... so he wept. But he doesn't have to weep... the one born from God did prevail. End of commentary!

The word "man" is not in the text... it just says, "no one was worthy." In fact, the KJV does use the word "man." If we read ahead, we see that Jesus prevailed to become worthy: It tells us He became the Redeemer and that is why He became worthy.

The KJV added the word "man" because it is in the context, which I agree with. But the word for man is not in that verse. The word for "no man" in the KJV is oudeis, which is one... with a prefix to make it "no one" we get "no one." The Greek word for man (well, for human but it can be in masculine or feminine) is anthrōpos. That word isn't in that line in the Greek

No reason to cover the rest... I have no desire to argue with you.

Blessings.
Ken

 

[iamlamad]

You said...



You've had an issue the entire time over why nobody was found worthy in one verse, and then was in the next. I have explained it to you as best I can, sorry... I can't do better. There was none worthy among those born of man... so he wept. But he doesn't have to weep... the one born from God did prevail. End of commentary!

The KJV added the word "man" because it is in the context, which I agree with. But the word for man is not in that verse. The word for "no man" in the KJV is oudeis, which is one... with a prefix to make it "no one" we get "no one." The Greek word for man (well, for human but it can be in masculine or feminine) is anthrōpos. That word isn't in that line in the Greek

No reason to cover the rest... I have no desire to argue with you.

Blessings.
Ken

Thanks, Ken. Yours was an explanation; I just disagree with it. The KJV people were not infallible.

 

[Alithis]

Explain.

Its very plain.. And obvious..

You want to take a basic Sentance extracted from an over all text and endlessly debate it to no value or edification.

Scripture warns against doing so.

 

[iamlamad]

Its very plain.. And obvious..

You want to take a basic Sentance extracted from an over all text and endlessly debate it to no value or edification.

Scripture warns against doing so.

It is extremely poor exegesis to take one verse out of its context. I am asking about the context of the entire passage: chapters 4 & 5. I think they tell a story that sets the timing of the first seal. I think that is God's purpose for these two chapters. it seems few agree with me.

God meant for the first seal to be the church sent out with the gospel; circa 32 AD.

Most people today want the first seal to mean the Antichrist.