How many Lord of lords are there?

Silas

Well-Known Member
Messages
896
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Deu 10:17 says of Jehovah...

"For the Lord your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who is not partial and takes no bribe."

Rev 19:16 says of Jesus...

"On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords."

How many "Lords of lords" are there if Jesus isnt God?
 
I would say that Jesus of Nazareth, the man, represents the summum bonum of Human potential. This is our perfect example (for Christians), of what we are capable of attaining, if we live as God intends, and fulfil our role as co-Creators with God (on a smaller scale, obviously).

Christ, in turn, is the Lord of Lords, the Master alike of Angels and of Humanity. This is on a much greater scale than simply the Human, for this refers to all life on Earth, and not just the Human Kingdom. Christ also says, "None comes to the Father except through me," which refers to His position as Hierophant of the Mysteries, and of Initiation into God's Kingdom.

Finally, there is the One Initiator, the Ancient of Days, Melchizedek, and the Lord of the World, or Earth Logos. God the Father, as such, is the One in Whom we live, and move, and have our being ... just as our own body serves as host to countless lesser lives. We can consider these in terms of organs (heart, lungs, brain, lower creative function, etc.), or cells, or even the atomic & subatomic particles ... which are God's creation every bit as much as trees, animals, angels and men.

Every Individual Life (or being) is composed of countless lesser lives. The greater being, whether a man, a perfected Son of God, or even a Logos, as that of the Earth (God the Father, the Ancient of Days) ... consists of smaller units, yet the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. In each case, there is a synthetic, or wholistic princple, which super-stands - or exists above, the lesser lives (yet not "apart from" them, for this implies separation, which is not).

The answer to the question, then, depends on perspective. We will not find absolute answers, while yet we live within conditioned reality. Everything must be considered in the context of other things. We may be able to say that there is only One Absolute, yet that refers to the Unconditioned, Transcendental Ground of Being. And that is something altogether beyond our ken.

This is how I see it.

~Zag
 
I would say that Jesus of Nazareth, the man, represents the summum bonum of Human potential. This is our perfect example (for Christians), of what we are capable of attaining, if we live as God intends, and fulfil our role as co-Creators with God (on a smaller scale, obviously).

Christ, in turn, is the Lord of Lords, the Master alike of Angels and of Humanity. This is on a much greater scale than simply the Human, for this refers to all life on Earth, and not just the Human Kingdom. Christ also says, "None comes to the Father except through me," which refers to His position as Hierophant of the Mysteries, and of Initiation into God's Kingdom.

Finally, there is the One Initiator, the Ancient of Days, Melchizedek, and the Lord of the World, or Earth Logos. God the Father, as such, is the One in Whom we live, and move, and have our being ... just as our own body serves as host to countless lesser lives. We can consider these in terms of organs (heart, lungs, brain, lower creative function, etc.), or cells, or even the atomic & subatomic particles ... which are God's creation every bit as much as trees, animals, angels and men.

Every Individual Life (or being) is composed of countless lesser lives. The greater being, whether a man, a perfected Son of God, or even a Logos, as that of the Earth (God the Father, the Ancient of Days) ... consists of smaller units, yet the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. In each case, there is a synthetic, or wholistic princple, which super-stands - or exists above, the lesser lives (yet not "apart from" them, for this implies separation, which is not).

The answer to the question, then, depends on perspective. We will not find absolute answers, while yet we live within conditioned reality. Everything must be considered in the context of other things. We may be able to say that there is only One Absolute, yet that refers to the Unconditioned, Transcendental Ground of Being. And that is something altogether beyond our ken.

This is how I see it.

~Zag


Speaking to a friend I said, "Look at that painting over there, my Father painted it." She looked at me and said "oh wow, cool!" "Yes, I know," I said. "It as picture of a bird flying into the sunset." "Very interesting," she said. "To me it represents man's freedom. He has thown away all the vain and empty persuits that once enslaved him and now he is free to fly away." "You see all of that?" I said. "My father only meant it to be a bird flying into the sunset." My friend continued..."Yeah, thats all great, but I see what I see." "What does it matter if you see something else?" I asked. "It is not the point of the painter. What you see is not what he said it meant. He meant it to be what it painted of a bird flying into the sunset."

Whats the point of that little story? The point is you cannot infer a meaning that was not intended by the author. If what you see is not what the author intended for you to see, you'd be wrong in what you see. Try to let the Bible interprete itself and dont just make up things, no matter how creative it may be. Its only fair, you know?
 
Whats the point of that little story? The point is you cannot infer a meaning that was not intended by the author. If what you see is not what the author intended for you to see, you'd be wrong in what you see. Try to let the Bible interprete itself and dont just make up things, no matter how creative it may be. Its only fair, you know?
Silas, you assume much, and in so doing, you are wrong. Think about this, and remember, the author(s) did indeed intend something, when they wrote the accounts we now have - of what happened thousands of years ago.

You may have your own interpretation of what the authors were saying, but you asked the question, how many Lords of lords are there? I answered you. Jesus was not, is not, and never will be "God" ... in a sense that you yourself won't, or in a way that we all won't, in time.

The Bible cannot "interprete itself," as you say, because it is printed words, on a page. It's just a book, no different than any other. What is useful about it, is that sometimes, when we are seeking understanding, illumination, insight, inspiration, or guidance, this book, like many others, can be helpful. But it is YOU who are doing the interpreting. Books do not THINK. Books do not UNDERSTAND. Books, in & of themselves, do not even INSPIRE. At best, they can SPARK this within us. And likewise, even the `Holy Spirit' - which is that Spirit which makes Understanding possible - cannot MAKE us see something, from without. It only works because our capacity to understand ... is within. :)

So, you can believe whatever you will. And you can interpret a bird flying into the sunset, any way you like. But I know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that what I wrote is meaningful to me, and I'd wager MY LIFE ... that this is in keeping with what is revealed via the Bible, for those with eyes to see, ears to hear it, even despite the mangling of this text throughout the centuries.

I have "made up" nothing whatsoever. I have expressed an understanding that works for me, and it is every bit as accurate, for me, in my life, and at this stage of my own spiritual search ... as YOUR understanding is for you. You don't happen to Agree with my interpretation, eh? GET OVER IT

You don't have to. Just don't pretend that YOU yourself know best, or better. There are as many ways to read a religious text, as there are people on the planet. I do agree that the various and many authors of the Old and New Testaments, as well as various other Gnostic, apocryphal and equally valid testimonies, DID have specific thoughts & intentions in mind when they committed their accounts to paper (tablet, etc.).

But I DO NOT believe, that Silas, or anyone else on this planet - including the Pope, or any other ecclesiastical "authority," has either the right, or the qualification, to TELL ME what to believe, or to dictate how I should interpret a particular spiritual text. Calvinist, Catholic ... it makes little difference, when you insist that THIS READING ALONE is how things must be accepted. But you step WAY over the line when you say, YOU ARE WRONG.

Check again. That's not the purpose of discussion at CR. That isn't discussion, or dialogue, at all. That's a way to END discussion, by trying to rubber stamp a certain angle on things ... into the minds of those around you. And you know, I don't care HOW inspired you are or were, or how deep down you feel some kinda of divine inspiration moving you to testify to x, y or z. Either you can do it in a way that INVITES discussion ...

... or it really isn't worth saying at all, now is it? :(

If you disagree with my response, then discuss it. Address it. Challenge it. Provide an alternative interpretation or approach ... and defend it. But don't say, "You made this up, you're wrong." Why bother asking the question in the first place, if all you wanted was a platform to preach from, and to bonk people over the head who don't SEE things YOUR way?

~Zag
 
Silas, you assume much, and in so doing, you are wrong. Think about this, and remember, the author(s) did indeed intend something, when they wrote the accounts we now have - of what happened thousands of years ago.

You may have your own interpretation of what the authors were saying, but you asked the question, how many Lords of lords are there? I answered you. Jesus was not, is not, and never will be "God" ... in a sense that you yourself won't, or in a way that we all won't, in time.

The Bible cannot "interprete itself," as you say, because it is printed words, on a page. It's just a book, no different than any other. What is useful about it, is that sometimes, when we are seeking understanding, illumination, insight, inspiration, or guidance, this book, like many others, can be helpful. But it is YOU who are doing the interpreting. Books do not THINK. Books do not UNDERSTAND. Books, in & of themselves, do not even INSPIRE. At best, they can SPARK this within us. And likewise, even the `Holy Spirit' - which is that Spirit which makes Understanding possible - cannot MAKE us see something, from without. It only works because our capacity to understand ... is within. :)

So, you can believe whatever you will. And you can interpret a bird flying into the sunset, any way you like. But I know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that what I wrote is meaningful to me, and I'd wager MY LIFE ... that this is in keeping with what is revealed via the Bible, for those with eyes to see, ears to hear it, even despite the mangling of this text throughout the centuries.

I have "made up" nothing whatsoever. I have expressed an understanding that works for me, and it is every bit as accurate, for me, in my life, and at this stage of my own spiritual search ... as YOUR understanding is for you. You don't happen to Agree with my interpretation, eh? GET OVER IT

You don't have to. Just don't pretend that YOU yourself know best, or better. There are as many ways to read a religious text, as there are people on the planet. I do agree that the various and many authors of the Old and New Testaments, as well as various other Gnostic, apocryphal and equally valid testimonies, DID have specific thoughts & intentions in mind when they committed their accounts to paper (tablet, etc.).

But I DO NOT believe, that Silas, or anyone else on this planet - including the Pope, or any other ecclesiastical "authority," has either the right, or the qualification, to TELL ME what to believe, or to dictate how I should interpret a particular spiritual text. Calvinist, Catholic ... it makes little difference, when you insist that THIS READING ALONE is how things must be accepted. But you step WAY over the line when you say, YOU ARE WRONG.

Check again. That's not the purpose of discussion at CR. That isn't discussion, or dialogue, at all. That's a way to END discussion, by trying to rubber stamp a certain angle on things ... into the minds of those around you. And you know, I don't care HOW inspired you are or were, or how deep down you feel some kinda of divine inspiration moving you to testify to x, y or z. Either you can do it in a way that INVITES discussion ...

... or it really isn't worth saying at all, now is it? :(

If you disagree with my response, then discuss it. Address it. Challenge it. Provide an alternative interpretation or approach ... and defend it. But don't say, "You made this up, you're wrong." Why bother asking the question in the first place, if all you wanted was a platform to preach from, and to bonk people over the head who don't SEE things YOUR way?

~Zag

Hey Zag,

The Bible does interpret itself actually. To be honest, you would know that if you would just study it. I promise you, it is really a remarkable work and isnt "just a book," as you claim. It is obvious that you are not a believer and I dont wish to talk about that now. For now I'll just say this: Jesus does not represents the summum bonum of Human potential, and the rest of what you said was not biblical. You interpreted something that was not intended and was not even implied. What you did is called eisigesis and it leads to Hersey. It is your choice to believe what you will and I am not here to convert you. In saying that however, I would appriciate it if you would stay true to scripture and not infer things that arent meant to be believed upon. The Bible is not a book for you to say "this is what I see." Rather, it says what it says and you either believe it or not. Dont change or alter its meaning when it doesnt leave that option open for us.

Later,

Silas
 
The Bible... is really a remarkable work and isnt "just a book," as you claim.
Namaste Silas, 2 funny you thinking Zag hasn't studied! So glad you told us you don't have a holier than thou attitude else I would always think you do:D

No the bible isn't 'just a book' it IS a compendium of books, of stories, a mixture of allegory, analogy, facts, history, metaphor, myth, parables and mystical teachings. Out of the hundreds of ancient oral traditions which were written down decades and centuries apart, the collection was accumulated together centuries after the last writings and 66 such books were compiled into one text.
 
If anyone doesnt like The Book. The compendium of books, of stories, a mixture of allegory, analogy, facts, history, metaphor, myth, parables and mystical teachings if thats what you want to call it.

If you do not like the Bible or Christianity at all that is fine.
You are more than welcome to make up your own religion just do like most people and come up with a name for it.
You surely will not be the first theres quite a few who have done it.:)
 
The Bible is not a book for you to say "this is what I see." Rather, it says what it says and you either believe it or not. Dont change or alter its meaning when it doesnt leave that option open for us.

Heh, strange... I could have -sworn- that is exactly what people have done for centuries.....
 
If anyone doesnt like The Book. The compendium of books, of stories, a mixture of allegory, analogy, facts, history, metaphor, myth, parables and mystical teachings if thats what you want to call it.

If you do not like the Bible or Christianity at all that is fine.:)
Namaste Dor,

I love the book, and the stories, and all they contain in the words and behind them. The knowledge of its creation, the effect of translations and various interpretations, the added notations by scribes which then became scripture...that all just opens my awareness to what it is, doesn't deny any divine involvement in the process despite those who were involved had ulterior motives... one meant it for........but G-d meant it for good.

Standing and looking at 2nd century text of Mathew, a piece of the dead sea scrolls, a page from the first known bible....and the dozens of other ancient pre first millenia bibles on display last month was nothing short of amazing... but if I need be lambasted because I don't believe every jot and tittle to be historical fact... oh well, it is fine.:)
 
Namaste Dor,

I love the book, and the stories, and all they contain in the words and behind them. The knowledge of its creation, the effect of translations and various interpretations, the added notations by scribes which then became scripture...that all just opens my awareness to what it is, doesn't deny any divine involvement in the process despite those who were involved had ulterior motives... one meant it for........but G-d meant it for good.

Standing and looking at 2nd century text of Mathew, a piece of the dead sea scrolls, a page from the first known bible....and the dozens of other ancient pre first millenia bibles on display last month was nothing short of amazing... but if I need be lambasted because I don't believe every jot and tittle to be historical fact... oh well, it is fine.:)

So what parts of the Bible do you believe?
 

So what parts of the Bible do you believe?
Well I don't believe that Moses brought 5 books down off the mountain and chronicled his own death....

I believe the Jesus Seminar with their huge contingent of scholars has spent more time and energy than I could in 10 lifetimes to determine what Jesus said and did....

I don't believe Jonah was swallowed by a big fish, I do believe it was an op-ed piece with a moral...

your thoughts on the above?
 
I did not lambaste you. I just said if its not for someone to make up their own just dont try to legitimize it by using the name....not even saying you do this.:)
 
wil

Well I don't believe that Moses brought 5 books down off the mountain and chronicled his own death....

Why not?


I believe the Jesus Seminar with their huge contingent of scholars has spent more time and energy than I could in 10 lifetimes to determine what Jesus said and did....

The words "Jesus seminar" and "scholars" dont go well together. Not even secular scholars take them seriously. But that aside, why do you agree with them and not the Bible's account?


I don't believe Jonah was swallowed by a big fish, I do believe it was an op-ed piece with a moral...

Do you believe that God created the world and could do anything?

your thoughts on the above?

That you're not a Christian.
 
I believe the Jesus Seminar with their huge contingent of scholars has spent more time and energy than I could in 10 lifetimes to determine what Jesus said and did....

You mean the same Jesus Seminar with the righteous Spongebob.

Sorry Wil but any seminar with John Shelby Sponge hold little light to alot of people not hard to see where he comes from and it sure is not God.
 
You mean the same Jesus Seminar with the righteous Spongebob.

Sorry Wil but any seminar with John Shelby Sponge hold little light to alot of people not hard to see where he comes from and it sure is not God.

Retired Anglican Bishop Spong is not part of the Jesus Seminar. Disagree all you want, but have a little respect please.
 
Namaste Dor, my bad
wil

Well I don't believe that Moses brought 5 books down off the mountain and chronicled his own death....

Why not?
Namaste Silas,

So I guess your learned teachers don't believe in the Y, E, P, D authors of the five books? And I suppose you can tell me how Moses chronicled his death?
I believe the Jesus Seminar with their huge contingent of scholars has spent more time and energy than I could in 10 lifetimes to determine what Jesus said and did....

The words "Jesus seminar" and "scholars" dont go well together. Not even secular scholars take them seriously. But that aside, why do you agree with them and not the Bible's account?
Which secular scholars are you referring to? And by what reasoning do you knock out those that took part in the seminar? Your credentials far surpass theirs? Mine don't so I continue to read from many sources.
I don't believe Jonah was swallowed by a big fish, I do believe it was an op-ed piece with a moral...

Do you believe that God created the world and could do anything?
Evading the issue by asking a question? Yes, of course I believe my definitioin of G-d and yours may vary. Please to provide yours.
your thoughts on the above?

That you're not a Christian.
How Christian of you. No skin off my nose, I'll continue to read, study, absorb and follow the teachings of my elder brother and wayshower Jesus the Christ.
 
Retired Anglican Bishop Spong is not part of the Jesus Seminar. Disagree all you want, but have a little respect please.
Funny their website and Wiki both list him as either a past or present member so you might recheck that.
I have to love the man....I do not have to respect a single thing he has said he is just a man and we will leave it at that.
 
Back
Top