Liturgical Worship - Do you like it?

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by mfblume

He saw what he said he saw. A lamb. He did not say He saw a human-formed Jesus and thought to relate it to us by referring to Him as a lamb with seven eyes and horns in poetic inspiration. HE SAW A LAMB WITH 7 EYES AND HORNS, because he was seeing visions.

John wrote....

Revelation 5:6-7
6And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.
7And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne.

First John says that he saw one who "stood". Lambs don't stand. He uses the symbol of a lamb, for Christ was the Lamb of God. John saw the nail scared hands, the pierced side, and the shredded brow of the Savior, and describes him appearing as a lamb that had been slain. John then speaks of the seven eyes, he is all seeing and knowing. John then speaks of his seven horns, he is all powerful. John then states that this "Lamb" (Jesus) walked up and "took the book out of the right hand of him who sat on the throne", that requires walking and hands. John saw Jesus and described him using vivid symbolic imagery. John didn't see a lamb down on all fours get up and take a book in his hoof. lol

[SmartAlex]

Originally Posted by Antipas

John wrote....

Revelation 5:6-7
6And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.
7And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne.

First John says that he saw one who "stood". Lambs don't stand. He uses the symbol of a lamb, for Christ was the Lamb of God. John saw the nail scared hands, the pierced side, and the shredded brow of the Savior, and describes him appearing as a lamb that had been slain. John then speaks of the seven eyes, he is all seeing and knowing. John then speaks of his seven horns, he is all powerful. John then states that this "Lamb" (Jesus) walked up and "took the book out of the right hand of him who sat on the throne", that requires walking and hands. John saw Jesus and described him using vivid symbolic imagery. John didn't see a lamb down on all fours get up and take a book in his hoof. lol

Lamb's don't stand?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Antipas

John wrote....

Revelation 5:6-7
6And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.
7And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne.

First John says that he saw one who "stood". Lambs don't stand. He uses the symbol of a lamb, for Christ was the Lamb of God.

I think you are reading this completely wrong, but that is my opinion.

It stood on four legs after having been slain and dead, implying it lay dead afore.

John saw the nail scared hands, the pierced side, and the shredded brow of the Savior, and describes him appearing as a lamb that had been slain.

Incorrect. He literally saw a lamb with blood all over it, and seven eyes and horns. He would not say the Lamb had seven eyes and horns if he literally saw a MAN Jesus Christ. No biblical poem says anything in the ballpark of that sort of thing in purposefully symbolic poetry on the behalf of the writer.

John then speaks of the seven eyes, he is all seeing and knowing. John then speaks of his seven horns, he is all powerful. John then states that this "Lamb" (Jesus) walked up and "took the book out of the right hand of him who sat on the throne", that requires walking and hands. John saw Jesus and described him using vivid symbolic imagery. John didn't see a lamb down on all fours get up and take a book in his hoof. lol

Sorry, I disagree. John did see that in the visions, and God gave Him symbols in those visions. That is why the first verse says the message was "signifed", betokened.

John was not waxing poetic. He was reporting what he saw.

[mfblume]

Anitpas,

You still never answered why John said He saw One on the throne, while writing in 1 John 4 that no man has ever seen God at any time. How could that be akin to seeing the beaten and bleeding Jesus as a man who was dead, and choosing to describe Him as a lamb in poetic manner?

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by mfblume

You ask me what I believe, and do not respond with your own beliefs. Do you believe John saw God or not (According to Rev 4's vision of one on the throne), knowing that the same writer said no man has ever seen God?

John saw "one upon the throne". No doubt the glory was so great I doubt John could describe his features. John saw the glory of the one sitting upon the throne. Notice that while John uses vivid imagery to describe all the things he saw...he never attempts to describe the one sitting upon the throne...shrouded in glory.

I have no clue what Heaven looks like! I do believe there is an actual throne and Jesus actually sits on it. I believe angels are there and worship. But I have no idea what it actually looks like. Revelation only gives symbols of it all.

Some things are described in vivid symbolism in the context of real events that John was witnessed. In addition very symbolic visions took place in this context regarding the near future that was to soon come to pass.

Bro., if you want liturgy THAT MUCH, enjoy it! Whatever you want. But you are arguing a weak argument if you're saying liturgy is correct because Heaven actually uses incense according to Revelation.

Okay...let's assume you're right and all these things are mere symbols... if liturgy isn't correct or holy in God's sight... why would God use it as a consistent theme in John's vision? If liturgy was a fitting symbol of what happens in Heaven...there's evidently nothing wrong with it in God's sight.

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by SmartAlex

Lamb's don't stand?

They don't walk up to one sitting upon a throne and take a book their hands either.

John was using vivid imagery to describe Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world.

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by mfblume

John was not waxing poetic. He was reporting what he saw....

...in vivid symbolism, I'd conclude. It's the nature of apocalyptic writing.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Antipas

John saw "one upon the throne". No doubt the glory was so great I doubt John could describe his features. John saw the glory of the one sitting upon the throne. Notice that while John uses vivid imagery to describe all the things he saw...he never attempts to describe the one sitting upon the throne...shrouded in glory.

You cannot directly see a form of God whatsoever! He is omnipresent, bro. Everywhere present, no where absent. Only a theophany can be seen, if anything. But theophanies are not direct sightings of God. We would not be able to see beyond the surface of our eyes if we were to see God physically due to his omnipresence.

Okay...let's assume you're right and all these things are mere symbols... if liturgy isn't correct or holy in God's sight... why would God use it as a consistent theme in John's vision? If liturgy was a fitting symbol of what happens in Heaven...there's evidently nothing wrong with it in God's sight.

Who said it was wrong to use symbols? Dumb things, like I think liturgy is (dumb in light of what Revelation was actually saying), are not necessarily "wrong". It's just wrong to say He did not see symbols and to say that Revelation sets the stage for how we should conduct a service and make it dogmatic as the liturgical churches have done.

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Anitpas,

You still never answered why John said He saw One on the throne, while writing in 1 John 4 that no man has ever seen God at any time. How could that be akin to seeing the beaten and bleeding Jesus as a man who was dead, and choosing to describe Him as a lamb in poetic manner?

Remember, the Revelation is a piece of apocalyptic literature. John used heavy symbolism that the early church was quite familiar with. He described the crucified savior in all his power using symbols.

[SmartAlex]

Originally Posted by Antipas

They don't walk up to one sitting upon a throne and take a book their hands either.

John was using vivid imagery to describe Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world.

Baaaaaaa