Why do we ignore some scriptures?

[Manofheart777]

I've been following along. It seems that there are major mis-understandings about the the difference in roles between God and man. This had been revealed to me, and not too many come to really understand these things until they come close to God and God reveals deep spiritual truths to them personally. People cannot just make sense of things according to their own understanding or they might just be coming up with their own version on God. People don't like to admit that they really know very little about anything. Also, using quantum physics to explain spiritual world is like asking the devil to explain to you the bible. He'll do it for you all right, and it will even make sense. From meditating on Gods word, we can see clearly how the sovereignty of God works. You always have to look to the relationship between Jesus and God. Jesus is a man in every respect. When he was 1 years old, do you think he knew he was going to die on the cross? Did you think he knew he was the Christ? Did he even know he was a human? Probably not. No. No way. He was a human. He had to grow in wisdom and stature. He had to become who he was, he had to choose what he was going to do, he had all the responsibility of a human being. Did God know who he was? Yes. Why? Because God designed him and assigned him to his task even before the foundations of the earth. Did Jesus have a choice? Yes. He too could have broke his relationship with his father by going beyond his position. But the whole point is that he loved his father and never wanted to do that. So Luke says, he grew in favor with God and with man. He grew in favor with God. You say, but he was his Son, of coarse God loves him. This shows that you gotta to really grasp what the Bible is talking about. You can't just read some rules in scriptures and think you know everything, or even take a stance saying, I believe things are this way. The bible teaches to have a learning mind, always learning from Jesus, never thinking you know anything. American culture encourages people to choose what to believe. Believe whatever you want. Everybody thinks they know all about Spiritual life, but Jesus is saying, you are blind. Those who say that can see will be blind, and those who are blind will come to see. God says, believe in me! He's saying, I am real! I am one you must come to know. Stop guessing and come to me and see for yourself. Did the prophets know who Jesus was? Yes. They didn't know who or what person it would be, but they knew the time and they knew the task. The even knew he would be ugly. How where they able to know those things? How does God know about Jesus? We can see it in Jesus life. Look at John 5:19-20, 20 says, For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. So it's a Father, Son relationship going on. The Son is learning from the Father. People think Jesus came to the earth, and he just knew everything, what to do, where to go, he was Jesus and he was perfect. But that's not the way things go. Did Jesus ever hit his finger with a hammer accidentally while he was building a chair? Probably. So how was he righteous? Righteousness, is about having a right relationship with God. Jesus maintained a perfect relationship with his father. But that doesn't mean he lacked in free will. As he choose to love God and obey God, God revealed to Jesus more and more his creation purpose. Here is where he really came to know who he was, the Christ, and that he would die for the sins of the world. He came to know that he would die on a cross. It was only through his relationship with God that he came to know all these things. That's why it says, for the father loves the Son and shows him all he does. He talks about this a lot in fact because he wanted his disciples to learn this. He talks about his fathers business. He is learning his fathers business. Same with the prophets, as they came to know their fathers business, they came to know what God was doing in his creation work, and they came to fulfill their life purpose because they came to see who they where. The problem of humans goes deeper, the problem is, humans have lost their position in God, they lost their identity, and they don't know who they are, what they where created to do, or to be. God created humans in just a certain way in him, but because they disobeyed God, they lost their confidence before God became fugitives (Adam and Eve). Before they where really awesome, having the image and likeness of God, but now they become bread seekers. They are not like God, so they are in darkness, as to who they really are. Humans are supposed to be eternal beings, but they lost it. So by coming to know God, we come to kno why God created us in this place, at this time, for what purpose. God had something in mind, and he have to come to know our role.

Now about God. Understand that God lives outside of time and space. Actually time and space are both in him. Out of him came time and space, but he himself is outside of it. "In the beginning" describes it perfectly because actually when you look at this sentence, it's not grammatically correct. What does "IN" the beginning mean? It should say at the beginning, for the sentence to make sense because your talking about a certain place or time. But it does not say that, it says, in the beginning. If you draw a circle, and you say, this is the beginning. Then you put the pencil in the circle, the pencil is in the beginning. So where is the starting point? There is none, it goes beyond the beginning, past it. Everything outside the circle is all time and space, but in the circle goes beyond it. It's always there. The same God now is the same God who was in the beginning at this instance, all in the exact same moment, because there is no moment. Also he is not in a space, actually, space is out of him, or in him. So yes, he created everything already, and it's done because he finished it. But we don't play that role. To us, everything is going on in this live action. Now what bothers many people is coming to understand what sovereignty is about. And why people find it so hard to except is because they eventually must come to except that salvation is a two-way street, between God and man. People like to think that they are the only ones involved. They like to be in control of their own fate. But God is saying, no, I'm in control of your fate completely, all you can do is come to me and hope I will forgive you and accept you. Otherwise, you can do nothing no matter how hard you try. God does all the work. But God does love all people. Each person, and he wants them to come to him and to have an awesome love relationship with everyone. But they humble themselves, let go of what they're holding onto, and come. People have to understand that it is Gods choice weather or not he will accept them and he doesn't owe anyone. Actually no one can come unless God enables that person. God makes the first step in fact. How he died on the cross for us. But it's up to that person has a desire to know God and to come to have a relationship with God, and we come to see, God is faithful. He acknowledges that persons heart, and he establishes that person as his child. Then they are ready to really accept Jesus kingship over their lives, and then they can come to enter that love relationship with God. 2 way, not one. People think it is so mysterious, but it is very practical. As you pursue God, he is the one who establishes you and enables you.

Okay, what about the hearts that he hardens. Lets look at Pharaoh, God obviously hated his proud heart, so he hardened it. So people will say, how did he have free will. Obviously he did. God is the one who told Moses to challenge Pharaoh over and over, giving him so many chances. Why would he do this? And then just to harden Pharaohs heart? This is where people are confused about Gods sovereignty because it paints the actual picture of how the Spiritual world goes. This was the battle of hearts and spirit. Moses had the most humble heart in all the world the bible says, verses Pharaoh, who called himself god on earth, God did not control Pharaohs heart. God will never do that. He did not control Pharaoh in any way. If he did, he would be braking his own covenant of love, and he would be found as unrighteous by his own law. So he cannot do that. So how did he harden Pharaohs heart? It was through the situation. God was in control of all the situations. God raised Moses for this purpose, he also raised Pharaoh for this purpose. Pharaoh could have repented and turned to God. There was clear opportunity for him to do it over and over, but simply, God made it too impossible for him even to the point of completely annihilating him in the red sea. This shows that God can really do anything anytime for any reason. This shows we should pray more often. God is in control of everything. All the situations even right now. Do you believe this? If you do, your life should go differently than more Christians in America. We are the ones that have to make the seemingly impossible choices, and believe in God, that he will help us. Don't worry though, hopefully you won't have the same fate as Pharaoh, unless you repent. Remember, Pharaoh kept on compromising. It's because everything the situation got too steep for him, he did not have God to rely on, so he could only harden his heart. The Israelites relied on there shepherd Moses, and made it through the situation by faith. Red sea. But when we pray and ask God for help, he fights for us, and we can come out. A 2 way relationship. So everything is not done for us automatically like most Christians think. So now the question is, how does creation purpose work. All of us have creation purpose, but most will never come to reach it because they rebel against God. Isaiah gives us a clue in Isaiah 49:1 before I was born, the Lord called me, from my birth, he made mention of my name. What is he talking about here? Actually Isaiah chapter 6 talks about when he was called, at age 14 in the temple. So why is he now saying before I was born. Theres a clue in verse 2 when he says, “you made my mouth like a sharpened sword and a polished arrow.” In verse 49, he is shouting to the nations saying, listen here you Island, you distant nations. He was declaring to all the world that they must listen to him. How did he know that? He said, before I was born the Lord called him. This is talking about his creation purpose. As he lived in the relationship with God, he came to find out who he was and what to do with his life. He saw where he came from and where he was going. Everything became clear to him. His mission in God. Through obedience to Gods word, God refined him and revealed to him who he was. So he could boldly say, listen to me. But he was called when he was 14. As he lived in the relationship with God, he could see Gods work in his life, and more and more, he came to really see that God had been preparing him for this mission since the beginning.

Here the last and final point. Actually God can do anything he wants anytime no matter what, at any time, past present future. But, he made a covenant with mankind, and he choose to bind himself to his covenant of love, instead of just doing whatever he wants. Because he loves us and he wants the best for us. This is the Good News. He can do anything he wants, but he will abide by his covenant because he wants to establish a relationship with you. So I hope this helps people to understand clearly what this relationship with God is all about.

 

[Manofheart777]

my responce..

 

[GraceSeeker]

I've been following along....

The key section in what you wrote I believe is

So yes, he [God] created everything already, and it's done because he finished it. But we don't play that role. To us, everything is going on in this live action.

I basically agree with you. (Though phrases like "he finished it" themselves imply God being bound by time, a point I dispute but understand you were once again writing from within the human perspective of time.) But I also recognize that there is a whole group of serious, faithful, and biblically astute individuals who, while holding to the utter sovereignty of God, would at the same time propose that time unfolds before God just as it does with us. I believe it is probably differences with regard to this apriori assumption that causes lucaspa and me to disagree with about whether God is or is not outside of time. It would be nice for others who are still following this discussion to perhaps provide a biblical basis for their various assumptions on that point.

 

[Manofheart777]

(Though phrases like "he finished it" themselves imply God being bound by time, a point I dispute but understand you were once again writing from within the human perspective of time.) But I also recognize that there is a whole group of serious, faithful, and biblically astute individuals who, while holding to the utter sovereignty of God, would at the same time propose that time unfolds before God just as it does with us. I believe it is probably differences with regard to this apriori assumption that causes lucaspa and me to disagree with about whether God is or is not outside of time. It would be nice for others who are still following this discussion to perhaps provide a biblical basis for their various assumptions on that point.

Well, the Bible shows clearly that God has set everything for its time. Daniel for instance was able to see world powers and events that came to exist thousands of years into the future. The reason God gave these things to him was because he was a powerful politician, and it was very important for him to grasp all those things in order for him to do the work of God and to co work with God in his salvation purpose. So there you have God being in control of all things, and at the same time, God fighting for sovereign people, using a finite servant Daniel to carry out divine work according to his salvation purpose. The Bible records how proceeding of judgment will go showing that it has already happened in Gods eyes. But we can't say it has already happened, because we are living it sovereignly. This is the difference between being God and being a man. But we also see God handling events as they come. Notice in the Bible, God did not change some things. Like it says, he was grieved that he made man. It sounds like God made a mistake, but he wasn't going to correct it by going in the past and changing it. So we see, God does handle everything according to time also. Actually it's what I said earlier, God can do anything, but in dealing with humans and the human world, he binds himself to his covenant of love, his contract. He was mad at Sodom and Gomorrah for example, and he wanted to wipe it out. But he didn't just go and do what he wanted to do, but he first talked with his covenant person. That's what God wants to do, he wants to bring us into his business, that's why things are not so spikity spam like we want. Both of us are living now in 2011, not some other time. Does other times exist right now? I don't think so, and infact, maybe time doesn't exist. I think it's more like that, but I don't know about that. I know we are subject to what God wants all the time. Actually, by his power, he is the one holding us together right now, even the whole universe. So he's dealing with us according to time. But not limited to it. We know, some things have to happen, because he promised it. So he will do it. But has he done it? From where I am, he has not done it yet, at all. As far as I'm concerned, all it is is a promise to me. Nothing I can hold in my hand. But God who is eternal and lives outside of time, has done everything already, and he is simply proceeding everything according to the history he has laid out. No one can understand everything, but knowing that God is the one wrestling continually with mankind can give a big clue as to what is going on. I hope these help..

 

[lucaspa]

The terms "Alpha and Omega" are not being understood literally, but as figures of speech, which I believe are used to describe Jesus' nature as an eternal being.

You are using the figure of speech to describe Jesus' nature literally. But that isn't the purpose of the passage.

When you say Revelation (there is only one, not multiple revelationS) is in code, I hope you aren't one of those who accepts the idea of some sort of numeric code hidden within the text.

Of course not. John of Patmos was in exile when he wrote Revelations. He had to get it past the Roman jailors/censors. Therefore much of Revelations is in a "code" of symbology that the Christians of the time would understand. We get glimpses of some of that code. For instance, in Rev 1:20 we are told that the seven stars and candlesticks mean the seven churches. But we are not given the rest of the code in the text; the people of the time had that. We no longer have it.

So John isn't writing straightforward theological commentary. When he says in Rev 1:8: "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty." the omission of "will be the Omega" is not significant. Of course, now that I look at the whole verse, the "which is to come" does give you the future tense that you originally claimed was lacking.

Merrian Webster defines omnipresent thusly: "present in all places at all times" (emphasis added)

And that is what God's Creation shows us is not happening. God can be in all places within a very short time, but not "at all times". Personally, I don't think this is a big deal.

With regard to God being everywhere, I refer you to Psalm 139, which I think is so clear as to not need any commentary.

It's poetry! And you are going to take it as literal to be "at all times"? Yes, God is in all these places, but He doesn't have to be omnipresent to do so.

And Isaiah 40:28 tells us that "The Lord is the everlasting God." And given that it is just one of many references to the eternal nature of God, I hardly think that there need be any great discussion with regard to God being at all times.

God is understood to be immortal. No question. But that doesn't mean God is actually present at all times before that time has happened. Again, 2 different concepts: immortality vs God being at points in spacetime before that time has happened.

As for God being present in our future, I believe that can be inferred from Isaiah 41:4 "Who has done this and carried it through, calling forth the generations from the beginning? I, the LORD—with the first of them and with the last—I am he.”

As an immortal being, of course God is going to be present in our future. But again, that is different than the concept that God is going to be there before that future happens.

my understanding of God is as a transcendent being who creates all that exists and holds it all together, but does not do so from within but outside of his creation and therefore must also exist outside of our time and space.

My understanding is also that God is outside our time and space. But I disagree with your extrapolation that this means that God is capable of looking into spacetime at a point that hasn't happened yet. God is also outside the 3 dimensions of space, but by saying that you would not imply that He would be able to look at the future, would you?

But, I don't think that we can use it to explain the fullness of God in whom all these things are held together (see Colossians 1:16-17).

We can use God's Creation to test ideas about God's relationship to that Creation. Now, if you want to say that God is omnipresent outside the universe, go ahead. But God's Creation tells us He is not omnipresent inside the universe. If He were, there would be no coherence.

As for my understanding of the nature of a photon, it was decades ago that I learned that. It may be that I misunderstood what was being taught at the time, and I certainly don't have the ability to track down my references. Take it or leave it.

Then I have to leave it. Particulary when we can look at gravitational lensing and other phenomenon where the photon must interact with objects betweent he point of origin and our eyes.

But it didn't take me long to do a quick search on Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle and find some similar things being said today: I don't imply that this substantiates what I said previously, but when referring to the photon when it is in motion the author writes "there is no discrete particle" and that "[it] does not exist."

Source? I say that because what you wrote has nothing to do with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The UP states that, in terms of complementary properties, that it is impossible to precisely know both at the same time. The classic example is the position and momentum of an electron. If we know the position exactly, we know nothing about the momentum. If we know the momentum precisely, we have no idea where the electron is. BTW, the UP refutes the omniscience of God within the universe. The UP is that it cannot be known. Not that we can't know it, or better measurement techniques would work, but rather that it is impossible to know. Even for God. Now, we can discuss possible reasons why God created the universe such that there are parts of it even He can't know, but that He can't know those parts is questionable.

It is only in the measuring of it that the photon materializes into an observable particle and behaves as a wave while in motion.

Again, interference patterns as the photon passes thru distant dust clouds refute that statement. The photon had to be "materialized" at that point.

 

[lucaspa]

I've been following along.

Excuse me, but why are you following a discussion in the Wesleyan forum?

It seems that there are major mis-understandings about the the difference in roles between God and man. This had been revealed to me, and not too many come to really understand these things until they come close to God and God reveals deep spiritual truths to them personally.

This becomes problematical. God is not going to reveal things to you that He does not to other people. I am going to have to test what you claim are His revelations to you against what He has revealed to other people, particularly what He has revealed to everyone via His Creation.

People cannot just make sense of things according to their own understanding or they might just be coming up with their own version on God.

But that's exactly what you are doing. You are claiming that you have a revelation that others don't. So you are claiming to have your own version of God. The difference is that you are claiming your version to be right.

Also, using quantum physics to explain spiritual world is like asking the devil to explain to you the bible.

I'm not. Quantum physics is part of God's Creation. I'm using what God tells us in His Creation to test ideas about what God is like. I'm listening to God. You have a problem with that? Or do you think something else -- like the devil -- was involved in Creation?

You always have to look to the relationship between Jesus and God. Jesus is a man in every respect. ... Did God know who he was? Yes. Why? Because God designed him and assigned him to his task even before the foundations of the earth.

Oops. You just violated Trinity. You have God "designing" Jesus when God is Jesus. Sorry, your private revelation just went against the revelation God gave the rest of us.

Did Jesus ever hit his finger with a hammer accidentally while he was building a chair? Probably. So how was he righteous?

Yes, Jesus probably hit his finger with a hammer. As you noted, Jesus was fully human. But righteousness has nothing to do with mistakes in coordination. Righteousness has to do with spiritual perfection.

Jesus maintained a perfect relationship with his father. But that doesn't mean he lacked in free will. As he choose to love God and obey God, God revealed to Jesus more and more his creation purpose. Here is where he really came to know who he was, the Christ, and that he would die for the sins of the world.

You seem to be an Adoptionist.

because they disobeyed God, they lost their confidence before God became fugitives (Adam and Eve). Before they where really awesome, having the image and likeness of God, but now they become bread seekers.

You are mixing creation stories. I agree that the "original sin" was disobedience of God. But the "in our image" comes from the Genesis 1 creation story, where there is no Adam and Eve. Instead, in that story God creates men and women, both plural. "In his image", in the language of the time, did not mean physical or mental likeness. It means that God empowered them and what humans did to the earth was as if God did it.

Humans are supposed to be eternal beings, but they lost it.

Humans were never supposed to be immortal beings; they were always going to die. That is present in both creation stories. In Genesis 1 humans are given food to eat. Why? Because, if we don't eat, we starve. To death. In Genesis 2 God tells Adam he will die "in the day" he eats the fruit. The Hebrew word is specific in specifying 24 hours. But Adam did not die in 24 hours. So the reference is to spiritual death. As you say, Adam was cut off from God by the disobedience. But Adam and Eve were always going to die a physical death.

Again, your personal revelation contradicts revelation given to the rest of us.

Understand that God lives outside of time and space. Actually time and space are both in him.

That's second sentence is not standard Christian thinking. Yes, God is outside the universe, which consists of matter/energy and spacetime. God created spacetime, but that does not mean it came "out of him". By your standards, spacetime would be a part of God's body, but God is not physical.

What does "IN" the beginning mean? It should say at the beginning, for the sentence to make sense because your talking about a certain place or time.

You are getting too carried away with semantics and the English translation. "in" can also refer to certain place or time. Such as "in my grandfather's day" or "in the time of the Roman Empire".

So yes, he created everything already, and it's done because he finished it.

Many Christians disagree with you about that point. Yes, Genesis 1 has creation ending, but that is because the authors wanted to make an analogy to the week and give a justification for the Sabbath.

But in the universe there are still things being created: stars, planets, species, for example.

"Creation is continuous --it is a creatio continua. The ongoing cosmic processes of evolution are God himself being creator in his own universe." A Peacocke, Biological evolution and Christian Theology in Darwinism and Divinity, 1985, pg 124.

But God is saying, no, I'm in control of your fate completely, all you can do is come to me and hope I will forgive you and accept you. Otherwise, you can do nothing no matter how hard you try. God does all the work.

That goes against Methodist theology. God does forgive us but we are still involved, and we can screw it up.

Actually no one can come unless God enables that person. God makes the first step in fact.

It's called prevenient grace in Methodism. But it's offered to everyone, so that "no one can come unless God enables that person" is meaningless, because God enables everyone.

But it's up to that person has a desire to know God and to come to have a relationship with God,

Oops. You just contradicted your "God does all the work". Here you have some work being done by people. What happens if you don't have any desire?

Okay, what about the hearts that he hardens. Lets look at Pharaoh, God obviously hated his proud heart, so he hardened it.

You are making this too complicated. In Exodus Pharoah's heart is manipulated so that God can unequivocally demonstrate His existence and power. Period. Taking it beyond the time period and what the authors wanted to say just ties you in knots and contradictions.

Actually God can do anything he wants anytime no matter what, at any time, past present future.

Can God create a rock so big that He cannot lift it? How about a 4 sided triangle? What's more, God couldn't have created a universe with just any set of physical constants if He wanted a universe with life in it. He was constrained to a particular, sometimes very finely tuned, set of physical constants.

God is powerful enough to do the things necessary to be God: create a universe, make a covenant with mankind, limit Himself so that our lives can have meaning, save us, become human, give us eternal life, etc. That does not mean He can do "anything he wants ... no matter what".

 

[Christos Anesti]

Just a possibly interesting related sidebar. I've been reading some of the commentaries of Pelagius and they don't sound very "Pelagian". Of all the ancient commentaries on Romans his seems to use the phrase justification by "faith alone" more than anyone else. He says that our works can not save us and only the grace of God that comes through faith can. I never saw anything to imply that he thought God wasn't necessary for faith either. It's true we don't have all his works to look over now though because many were lost.

Maybe he was accused of thinking that way because he didn't strictly seperate what was from grace and what was from nature? Maybe he thought our nature itself was given to us by grace though? It could also be that a misunderstanding between the latin and celtic Church existed with both sides talking past eachother.

I do know that Pelagius denied holding to the views attributed to him and that some people think that "Pelagianism" proper was the creation of one his students.

"Because the Jews did not know that God justifies by faith alone and because they thought they were righteous because of works of a law they did not keep, they refused to submit themselves to the forgiveness of sin, to prevent the appearence of having been sinners, as it is written: "But the Pharisees, rejecting God's purpose for themselves, refused to be baptized with Johns Baptism"

Pelagius's Commentary on Romans.

When an ungoldy person is converted, God justifies him by faith alone, not for good works which he does not have. On that basis he would have been punished for his ungodly works. But note that Paul does not say one who remains in sin is justified by faith but rather the ungodly, i.e., the one who has just come to believe."

-Pelagius Commentary on Romans.

 

[Woldeyesus]

How? Pretty much like I do with any other part of scripture: I read it, seek to understand what the passage is saying, and then apply it. The terms "Alpha and Omega" are not being understood literally, but as figures of speech, which I believe are used to describe Jesus' nature as an eternal being.When you say Revelation (there is only one, not multiple revelationS) is in code, I hope you aren't one of those who accepts the idea of some sort of numeric code hidden within the text. That it is a vision and at times difficult to understand the relation or import of the various symbols that are presented to the reader in the vision does not mean that a statement as simple as "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End" is precluded from being used for making theological points. Wesley's note on the text -- "Who exist from everlasting to everlasting. How clear, incontestable a proof does our Lord here give of his Divine glory!" -- shows his willingness to draw theological conclusions from it. Merrian Webster defines omnipresent thusly: "present in all places at all times" (emphasis added)With regard to God being everywhere, I refer you to Psalm 139, which I think is so clear as to not need any commentary.And Isaiah 40:28 tells us that "The Lord is the everlasting God." And given that it is just one of many references to the eternal nature of God, I hardly think that there need be any great discussion with regard to God being at all times.As for God being present in our future, I believe that can be inferred from Isaiah 41:4 "Who has done this and carried it through, calling forth the generations from the beginning? I, the LORD—with the first of them and with the last—I am he.” In Jesus God enters into creation and thus experiences time and space just as you and I do, but prior to the incarnation my understanding of God is as a transcendent being who creates all that exists and holds it all together, but does not do so from within but outside of his creation and therefore must also exist outside of our time and space. So, as interesting as quantum physics may be, and it is no doubt helpful to increase the understanding of God for some. But, I don't think that we can use it to explain the fullness of God in whom all these things are held together (see Colossians 1:16-17).As for my understanding of the nature of a photon, it was decades ago that I learned that. It may be that I misunderstood what was being taught at the time, and I certainly don't have the ability to track down my references. Take it or leave it. It matters little to me either way. But it didn't take me long to do a quick search on Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle and find some similar things being said today: I don't imply that this substantiates what I said previously, but when referring to the photon when it is in motion the author writes "there is no discrete particle" and that "[it] does not exist." That comes close to what I said. It is only in the measuring of it that the photon materializes into an observable particle and behaves as a wave while in motion.

From internal evidence in the Prelude, i.e., the fourth gospel, it is possible to conclude that the "Revelation to John" is the Finale or record of the "truth revealed by Jesus Christ" in the past as well as in the present.

Accordingly, the gospel "truth" is defined as the once and for all self-revelation of Christ's divine identity and absolute authority, as "I Am Who I Am", a.k.a., Almighty and everlasting God and the Father, in his perfect and diacritical death on the cross, as "the first and the last" (or Alpha and Omega) to be so revealed for the salvation of the world. AMEN.

 

[lucaspa]

From internal evidence in the Prelude, i.e., the fourth gospel, it is possible to conclude that the "Revelation to John" is the Finale or record of the "truth revealed by Jesus Christ" in the past as well as in the present.

What exactly is this "internal evidence"?

Accordingly, the gospel "truth" is defined as the once and for all self-revelation of Christ's divine identity and absolute authority,

Besides you, where is "gospel 'truth'" defined this way?

"For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak." John 12:49

"Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works." John 14:10

Those verses contradict your claim of "absolute authority".

 

[Woldeyesus]

What exactly is this "internal evidence"?



Besides you, where is "gospel 'truth'" defined this way?

"For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak." John 12:49

"Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works." John 14:10

Those verses contradict your claim of "absolute authority".

The development of the "internal evidence" for Christ's divine identity and absolute authority, in the fourth gospel, can be traced in the programamed instruction for the first disciples beginning at the promise: "I am telling you the truth: you will see heaven open and God's angels going up and coming down on the son of Man" (John 1:51) and culminating at its fulfillment in the final notice given by Jesus: "It is finished" (Ibid, 19:30) post scripted with: "People will look at him whom they pierced" (Zech. 12:10 quoted in John 19:37).

Although not sufficiently acknowledged today, the highlights of work-based sequences or controlled steps by Jesus are discernable in spite of his characteristic use of altruistic language, figures of speech and rhetorical questions (John 16: 25-28; Phil. 2: 5-8).

The following is an initial sample worth following up and confirming.

1. The first miracle: strictly measured backroom performance (2: 1-12)

2. Prophetic definition and application of the unique "passion of Christ" prophetically quoted and defined in terms of the cleansing of the Temple during the Passover Festival (2: 13-22)

3. GENESIS 2: notice of resumption for the creation of human beings in the image of God with intimated correlation to Christ's crucifixion and eternal life (3: 1-21)

4. Pending refinement of the terms and scope of true worship of a knowable God, "as he really is", i.e., in Spirit and truth (4: 1-26)

5. Refinement of the crucifixion as the conclusive means of Christ's divine identity, a. k.a., "I Am Who I Am", or "the Father" open to personal confirmation (8: 21-28)

6. Further refinement of the crucifixion as expression of Christ's absolute authority of giving up his life and it back again open to personal confirmation (10: 17-18, 37-38), etc.

By the grace of God, it is increasingly working for me for more than 3 decades!

 

[lucaspa]

The development of the "internal evidence" for Christ's divine identity and absolute authority, in the fourth gospel,

Sorry, but that wasn't your original claim or what I was asking evidence about. Your claim was:

From internal evidence in the Prelude, i.e., the fourth gospel, it is possible to conclude that the "Revelation to John" is the Finale or record of the "truth revealed by Jesus Christ" in the past as well as in the present.

I asked for the internal evidence in the fourth gospel that the fourth gospel was prelude to Revelations and that Revelations is the "Finale". Can you do that, please?

You didn't address the verses I gave you that contradict that Jesus has "absolute authority".

post scripted with: "People will look at him whom they pierced" (Zech. 12:10 quoted in John 19:37).

You need to put Zech 12:10 in context.
12:9 "And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. "

12:10: "And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for [his] only [son], and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for [his] firstborn. "

The problem with taking part of 12:10 out of context is that Jesus was not seeking to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. Jesus is the "Prince of Peace", not the destroyer. So Zech 12:10 can't be referring to Jesus.

Although not sufficiently acknowledged today, the highlights of work-based sequences or controlled steps by Jesus are discernable in spite of his characteristic use of altruistic language, figures of speech and rhetorical questions (John 16: 25-28; Phil. 2: 5-8).

3. GENESIS 2: notice of resumption for the creation of human beings in the image of God with intimated correlation to Christ's crucifixion and eternal life (3: 1-21)

Sorry, but John 3:1-21 has no correlation with the crucifixion or Genesis 1. It is in Genesis 1:26-27 that we have humans created "in the image" of God. Not Genesis 2. What we have in John 3 is the rebirth of people, not creation. Rebirth in spirit. The creation in Genesis 1 is the body. BTW, "in the image" doesn't mean what you think it does.

5. Refinement of the crucifixion as the conclusive means of Christ's divine identity, a. k.a., "I Am Who I Am", or "the Father" open to personal confirmation (8: 21-28)

I am puzzled at how you you use scripture. Jesus does not proclaim divine identity in John 8:21-28. In fact, in verse 28 there is a separation of Jesus and God:
"Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am [he], and [that] I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things. "

See? Jesus is claiming to be the "son of man". But notice that Jesus does "nothing of myself". That would speak against Jesus' divinity. So the verse doesn't say what you claim it does.

Now, in John 8:58 Jesus says "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. " Here he does use the "I am" formula of God. And in the next verse we see the people understood that he was doing so, because they try to stone Jesus for apostasy.

But this verse has no connection to the crucifixion. Jesus is proclaiming his "divine identity" independent of the crucifixion. That negates your claim "the crucifixion as the conclusive means of Christ's divine identity"

The crucifixion has nothing to do with extablishing Christ's divine identity. In fact, according to all the gospels, the disciples were discouraged. We have Peter denying he knew Jesus during the crucifixion. Peter would not do that if the crucifixion was the "conclusive means of Christ's divine identity."

Instead, it is the Resurrection that was the overwhelming evidence of Jesus' divinity.

6. Further refinement of the crucifixion as expression of Christ's absolute authority of giving up his life and it back again open to personal confirmation (10: 17-18, 37-38), etc.

That's not "absolute authority". But even here in John 10:18 we see "This commandment have I received of my Father. " He doesn't have the authority himself, but received a command from the Father.

John 10:37: "If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. "

It's not Jesus' "absolute authority", but the works of the Father.

By the grace of God, it is increasingly working for me for more than 3 decades!

When you try to make scripture say something contrary to what it really is saying, then I have to be skeptical that "it" has anything to do with God.