2

Revelation 1:8, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."

Revelation 1:11, "saying, "Write in a book what you see, and send it to the seven churches; to Ephesus and to Smyrna, and to Pergamum and to Thyatira and to Sardis and to Philadelphia and to Laodicea.'

Revelation 1:17, "And when I say Him, I fell at His feet as a dead man. And He laid His right hand upon me, saying, "Do not be afraid, I am the first and the last, Verse 18, "and the living One, and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and Hades."

Also at Revelation 22:12-13, "Behold, I am coming quickly and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done. Vs13, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."

13
  • 1
    @Kris I read your source and it rightly says that both "expressions" mean the same thing, that is Alpha & Omega and first and last. Your article then quotes Isaiah 44:6 so here is my question for you? From the NWT, "This is what Jehovah has said, the King of Israel and the Repurchaser of him, Jehovah of armies. I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no God. Is Jehovah in this verse Jehovah the Father?
    – Mr. Bond
    Sep 28, 2021 at 21:09
  • when context makes it clear that first and last is referencing death and resurrection it is referring to Jesus
    – Kris
    Sep 29, 2021 at 0:22
  • 1
    @Kris That's not what I ask you. My question is very specific so I'll repeat it. At Isaiah 44:6, is Jehovah in this verse Jehovah the Father? Why the "stall," it requires a yes or no answer.
    – Mr. Bond
    Sep 29, 2021 at 0:39
  • 2
    @Mr.Bond Yes, Jehovah always refers to the Father, including at Isaiah 44:6.
    – user32540
    Sep 29, 2021 at 10:38
  • 1
    @PeterTurner I see what you mean so I will reword it in the form of a question? Sort of like the game show "Jeopardy?" Thanks for the clarification.
    – Mr. Bond
    Oct 1, 2021 at 21:40

1 Answer 1

2

No, Jesus is not identified as 'the Almighty', God or 'the Eternal'. This is another question seeking to verify a theology of men and not of the bible. However, he is given the name of Alpha and Omega - we will see what this means and, does not mean

Denying Jesus' deity is an awkward way to say that we affirm Jesus as the human son of God. Making Jesus a God/man is to trivialise his willing, obedient and trusting sacrifice.

What God has made known rather abundantly, is that Jesus is His human son born of Mary and called to remain without sin until finally dying on a cross as Saviour for all mankind. In his role as the son of God, through his death, he has enabled the redemption and completion of God's creation.

yet to us there is one God the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we through Him. 1Cor 8:6

Apart from the obvious declaration about 'one God the Father', the rest of this passage shows the essential role of Jesus.

All things find their fulfilment in him - not because he made everything, but because he is the way, the only way to the Father and true life.

Jesus is not identified as THE Almighty. This is also abundantly clear in many places, and by Jesus' own words,

And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. John 17:3

No rational approach to the scriptures as a whole and cohesive narrative would lead to thinking Jesus is Supreme God when he clearly has a God - even once ascended this remains true.

Having ruled out that misunderstanding of scripture, why then does Jesus have this name that also is applied to God - the one true God, the God that Jesus said he had!

I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God Rev 1:8

Jesus is never called "Lord God" anywhere - why would John start here?

Rev. starts with, and needs no interpretation!

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him ...

  • Only those with a pre-supposed view of God and Jesus could mis-understand this simple line. Like so many other unambiguous, crystal-clear truths that tradition has masked with complexity and mystery to hide the true nature of Jesus and to minimise the true nature of God.

While the OP wants to quote titles from Revelations, he avoids the very strenuous examples of Jesus having a God - yes the exalted, now immortal Jesus, still has a God, as he always did. Rev 3:12 x 4 times!

The answer to the sharing of Titles is based on examples provided in both OT and NT usages. Trying to prove anything by what title God has, or is given to others, including Christ, is an exercise in curiosity but accomplishes little of any value.

King of Kings, Saviour, Lord, 'First and Last' is applied to both God and Jesus at different times and even other men who are not without sin.

Isaiah 44:6; 48:12 First and Last is God Rev 1:17; 2:8; 22:13 First and Last is Jesus

God the Father is called “Saviour” Is 43:11, 1 Tim 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; Tit 1:3; 2:10; 3:4; Jude 25

Jesus 1 John 4:14, Acts 5:31, Phil 3:20

Men designated as “saviour” 2 Kings 13:5; Isaiah 19:20 Obadiah 21.

We know from Isaiah and the child titled Immanuel - he wasn't God simply because his name represented "God with us", and neither should Jesus be called God because of a title he was given. Certainly, Jesus IS God with us, not because he is God, but because he is the image, form, and glory of God, representing Him perfectly.

Anyone who has seen me has seen (or known) the Father. John 14:9

There are plentiful plainly-spoken texts that tell the truth of God and His son. Trying to force a construct of unbiblical proportions on to Jesus with verses speaking of titles and names is not a useful pursuit. The bible shows no special reservation for titles - they are conferred on men and God and His son at various places.

Alpha and Omega IS applied to both God and Jesus - but for different reasons.

God is obviously the beginning and the end of all things. Christ is the beginning and the end because he is the firstborn from the dead, the author and finisher of faith for a couple of examples.

Alpha and Omega are two Greek letters! There is nothing about this we know from other texts - it's just an expression signifying uniqueness and special role. Deducing anything else is pure speculation. A cursory glance at Revelation reveals the Lamb is NOT GOD, and God is NOT the Lamb. So why would this title make ANY difference to our understanding of who Jesus is relative to his God and Father?

While we might try to identify Jesus according to tradition, he certainly does not self-identify as God.

Jesus said to her, “Stop clinging to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.’” John 20:17

++++++++++

We love to ponder Thomas and his statement, “My Lord and my God".

We have two options.

  1. put this, unusual comment in sync with the rest of the bible.
  2. reorient everything else to sync with Thomas. Thomas wasn't wrong in what he said, but any interpretation cannot be allowed to have a life of its own. We are not to use an ambiguous text to explain all the others. I have addressed Thomas here
12
  • 1
    @OneGodtheFather It is a very good point and how do you know God the Father is speaking? Show me from the text itself or from the surrounding context it is God the Father speaking? The only way it will work for you (but you would still be in error) is if your a Oneness Pentecostal/Modalist, are you? It is clearly obvious that the speaker is Jesus Christ, prove it otherwise?
    – Mr. Bond
    Sep 29, 2021 at 22:25
  • 2
    Minor point: You state that ”Jesus is never called "Lord God" anywhere - why would John start here?” Yet St. John does not object to St. Thomas calling Jesus: ”My Lord and my God!”
    – Ken Graham
    Sep 30, 2021 at 6:31
  • 1
    Yes, that's true. However, you have two options. You can put this, let's say 'unusual comment' in sync with the rest of the bible. Or you can reorient everything else to sync with Thomas. Thomas wasn't wrong in what he said, but our subsequent interpretation cannot be allowed to have a life of its own. We are not permitted to use an ambiguous text to explain all the others. I have addressed Thomas here: hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/15545/…
    – steveowen
    Sep 30, 2021 at 7:04
  • 1
    @Mr.Bond Sounds like the basis for another question, but yes, that verse is quite ambiguous. In a nut-shell, 1. Epistles usually open with greetings from both God and Jesus (Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; Gal. 1:3, and so on), so it would be unusual for this one to open with a statement that Jesus is God. 2. Peter speaks of God and Jesus in the same verse on a number of occasions, and never equates Jesus with God in them, but speaks of them as being different (1 Pet. 1:2, 3; 2:5; 3:21; 4:11; 5:10; 2 Pet. 1:2). ... Sep 30, 2021 at 23:45
  • 1
    @Mr.Bond ... God and Jesus are referred to as separate in the other epistles, which again would make this an unusual reading. 3. There are many non-trinitarian ways to translate 2 Peter 1:1 (cf. ASV, NOY, CJB, Weymouth, Rotherham, Noah Webster, Estes). 4. There are Aramaic, Latin, Coptic, Sahidic, and Greek manuscripts (including Sinaiticus and (044)) that have 'Lord' instead of God, and read, 'our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.' Translations from the Aramaic read 'our Lord and our Savior, Jesus Christ'. So yes, 2 Peter 1:1 is ambiguous. Sep 30, 2021 at 23:49

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .