Daniel 7:13-14 commentary

 

I saw in the night visions and behold one like THE SON OF MORTALS came with the Clouds of Heaven ^{Hebrews 12:1} and came to the Ancient of days and they brought him near before him And there was given him dominion and glory and a kingdom that all people nations and languages should serve him His dominion is an everlasting dominion which shall not pass away and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed

Comments: Daniel 7:13-14 is a companion scripture to Matthew 28:18 where Jesus told his disciples that all powers had been surrendered to him ^[Martin] both the powers in the heavens and the powers upon earth. Add Revelation 20 to that, and we see that the powers under the earth are included in that surrender. Nothing was given to Jesus as a gift, but, rather, everything surrendered to him, because he won the cosmic war.  

Jesus retains his humanity to this day and forever. Though all the fullness continues to reside in him in physical form, he is still human--one of us. Seeing him relate to his father as a human does not detract from his equal and autonomous authority within the Godhead, as Jesus is YHWH. 

It is not possible for mortals to comprehend how this can be, but it is sinful to create a gender-based hierarchy based upon a non-existent hierarchy within the Godhead.

Where there are no consequences for insubordination, there can be no subordination. Therefore, there is no hierarchy within the Godhead. Even in his humanity, Jesus was never for one second subordinate. He was not required to die on the cross. He volunteered for it. As a mortal, he was an obedient son though never a subordinate one. This is a vital distinction. Jesus’ obedience was purely voluntary out of love for those he became, but he could have walked away from the cross without personal consequence. Where there are no consequences for insubordination, there can be no subordination.

What do we think those twelve legions of angels would have been for, the ones that Jesus could have called before allowing himself to be taken and crucified? Jesus didn’t need twelve legions of angels to deliver him from Pilate’s horde. He proved that when he said two words, identifying himself as the God of the Burning Bush, “I AM.” [John 18:5-6] When he said that the armed horde fell backwards onto the ground. Even at that moment, all the fulness of the Godhead resided in Jesus in physical form. So, what would the angel armies have been for? They would have been for the final battle with the powers of darkness who already thought they had just won the war against the powers of light.

Had the princes of this world known they would never have crucified the LORD OF GLORY…. God could have won the cosmic war right then, but if Jesus had walked away from calvary and called for those angel armies, scripture would not have been fulfilled, and humanity would have been lost. 

When the Almighty took on human flesh, it was forever. Though The WORD set aside His glory in heaven for a few short years when He became THE SON ^{[Hebrews 1:5, Psalm 2:7]}, He never lost his deity and authority. He did not think it thievery to be equal with God ^{[Philippians 2:5-8 kjv]}. He boldly claimed Jehovahistic identity ^{[John 18:5-6]}. Jesus was and is fully God and fully human, though, ever since He conquered death at the resurrection, He is no longer mortal.  

Subscribe HERE to the Hungry Hearts Bible Commentary and conveniently receive commentaries via email.  

Ephesians 5:28-33 commentary

 

So ought men to love their women as their own bodies He that loves his wife loves himself For no man ever yet hated his own flesh but nourishes and cherishes it even as the Lord the church For we are members of his body of his flesh and of his bones For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and shall be joined unto his woman and they two shall be one flesh This is a great mystery but I speak concerning Christ and the church Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself and the wife that she fear her husband

Comments: Ephesians 5:28-33 does not establish gender-based hierarchy, as Christians are so commonly taught. What it establishes is that, because of The Fall, husbands will have a sinful tendency to love themselves more than they love their wives. This passage establishes the fact that the prophecy in Genesis 3:16 is being fulfilled and that husbands need to be encouraged to love their wives at least as much as they love their own selves.

But wait, isn’t Jesus’ command that we one another as HE loves us given to the entire Body of Christ? Is it a gender-based command? Is Paul’s reminder to selflessly love one another by preferring one another before ourselves a gender-based admonition? Was Peter’s reminder to love one another deeply a gender-based admonition? So how is it that husbands needing to be told to love their wives is somehow a good thing?

Only gender-biased-theology can transform a fulfillment of a cursed prophecy into a compliment. Ephesians 5:28-33 does not confirm a gender-based hierarchy. Rather, in fulfillment of the prophecy in Genesis 3:16, it confirms that husbands will not only have a sinful tendency not to love their wives as Christ loves us but that husbands will be tempted to not love their wives even as much as they love their own selves.

There is no separate set of biblical rules for wives and husbands than for any other Christian. Christ’s commandment for all of his followers to love each other as HE loves us is not a gender-based command, and it is to be taken seriously by every Believer.

So why is it that husbands need to be commanded to love their wives … at least as much as they love their own selves?

Wives are never commanded to love their husbands. Does that mean they don’t have to? Of course not.

Why is it that husbands are warned that if they do not treat their wives right, their prayers will be hindered? Why is it that Paul warned women (Ephesians 5:33) that they should be afraid of their husbands (The Greek word in that verse is more accurately translated as a phobia-based “fear,” and not “reverence”)?

Gender-biased-theology has transformed and twisted the prophecies in Genesis 3:16, into both blessing (for men) and slander (of women). The prophecy was that men would have a sinful tendency to dominate their women and that women would have a sinful tendency to love their men more than their Creator.

Complementarianism teaches women to ignore the voice of God and follow the voice of their husbands, should the two voices contradict.

Complementarianism teaches that women do not have to answer to God if they obey their husbands, even if their husbands lead them into sin. God does not bless sin, whether it is committed by women or men. And he certainly did not bless the first male for disobeying the only “Thou shalt not,” that he was given in The Garden.

Each of the first pair suffered the consequence of their action. The only blessings given in the Genesis three passage, were given to the woman, when she was told that her conception would be multiplied (children are blessings and not curses) and that one of her offspring would defeat the serpent.

As for Ephesians 5:28-33, It is not a hierarchical passage confirming gender-based-authority of men over women, but rather a reproach on husbands that they even need to be commanded to love their wives in the first place.

Husbands who are living their lives according to the Word of God and the leading of the Holy Spirit, THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH, do not need to be commanded to love their wives.

Ephesians 5:28-33 is meant for men and women who have drunk **the complementarian Kool-Aid, and, because of that some husbands have become physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual threats to some wives.

**Many couples who give lip-service to complementarianism either have or appear to have happy marriages. Complementarian leaders point to this as proof that their doctrine is scriptural and that their unbiblical model of male governance “works.” Looking below the surface, it is often found that in practice, happy couples who give lip service to complementarianism actually live egalitarian lives. Others, such as in the case of [the late] Elisabeth Elliot, hide the authoritarianism and unhappiness in their marriages. Elliot was a life-long champion of male governance. Her marriages were all based on the complementarian model of females submitting to males. In her 1966 book, Let Me be a Woman, Elliot admitted to unhappiness in her marriage but refused to admit the reason for it. She advised her daughter that she should expect to cry for no reason, that women simply cry for “no reason.” I submit to you, that no one cries for no reason. 

Thankfully, there are men do not fall for the complementarian siren song of male governance. Ephesians 5:28-33 is not meant for such men. Likewise, it is not meant for women who are married to such men. These wives need not fear their husbands.

1 Peter 3 Commentary

       1: Likewise the women yield to your own men that if any obey not the Word they also may without the Word be won by the behavior of the wives [1] 2: While with fear they view your pure lifestyle [2] ^phobo 3: Whose adorning let it not be the outward adorning of braiding the hair and of wearing of gold or of putting on of [expensive/flamboyant] clothing 4: But let it be the hidden person of the heart in that which is not corruptible even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit which is in the sight of God of great price [3] 5: For after this manner in the old time the holy women also who trusted in God adorned themselves yielding to their own men 6: Even as Sara obeyed Abraham calling him master [4] of whom you have become offspring’s ones doing good and not fearing anything 7: Likewise you husbands ones making a home together with them in an understanding way giving honor to the wife as to the [physically]weaker vessel [5] and as being heirs together of the grace of life that your prayers be not hindered [6] 8: Finally all of you be [of] one mind having compassion one for another Love as brothers and sisters Be full of compassion Be courteous 9: Not rendering evil for evil or railing for railing but contrariwise blessing Knowing that into this you are called that you should inherit a blessing 10: For they that will love life and see good days let them refrain their tongues from evil and their lips that they speak no guile 11: Let them avoid evil and do good Let them seek peace and pursue it 12: For the eyes of the Lord are over the just ones and his ears are open to their prayers but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil 13: And who are they that will harm you if you be followers of that which is good 14: But and if you suffer for righteousness' sake happy are you and be not afraid of their terror neither be troubled 15: But make holy the Lord God in your hearts and be ready always to give an answer to everyone that asks you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear 16: Having a good conscience that whereas they speak evil of you as of evildoers they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good behavior in Christ 17: For it is better if the will of God be so that you suffer for well doing than for evil doing [7] 18: For Christ also hath once suffered for sins the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit 19: By which also he went and preached to the spirits in prison 20: Which sometime were disobedient when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah while the ark was a preparing wherein few that is eight souls were saved by water 21: The representation even baptism which does also now save us not the putting off of the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good conscience toward God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ 22: Who is gone into heaven and is on the right hand of God ^YHWH angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him

---

[1] In 1 Peter 3:1, is the writer telling wives that they are basically slaves and should emulate the subjective behavior of slaves as instructed in 1 Peter 2:18?

This writer does not believe so. Hebrew and Greek scholar, Bruce Fleming, does not believe so either. Fleming teaches that 1 Peter 3:1 is not connected at all with 1 Peter 2:18-25 but rather an entirely new subject. He speaks about this in season four of his Eden Podcast, and he makes some very good points: The Eden Podcast with Bruce C. E. Fleming: BEST OF Season Four! 1 Cor 11, 14 & 1 Peter 3 on Apple Podcasts

 Fleming’s interpretation is possible. But regardless, this writer believes there is no doubt [that in the mind of the biblical writer] 1 Peter 3:1 is a continuation of the subject introduced in the last eight verses of 1 Peter 2 [:18-25] about slaves enduring unjust harshness and violence from masters. Without chapter and verse breaks [which is how the Bible was originally written], the passage is clearly one unbroken conversation about one topic, that of slaves being subject to masters and the writer leads seamlessly into the subject of women subjecting themselves to men: QUOTE “Slaves [be] subject to [your] masters with all fear not only to the good and gentle but also to the froward For this [is] thankworthy if one for conscience toward God endure grief suffering wrongfully For what glory [is it] if when you be beaten for your faults you shall take it patiently But if when you do well and suffer [for it] you take it patiently this [is] acceptable with God For even to this were you called ^{we are all called to this} because Christ also suffered for us leaving us an example that you should follow his steps Who did no sin neither was guile found in his mouth Who when he was reviled, reviled not again When He suffered he threatened not but committed [himself] to Him that judges righteously Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree that we being dead to sins should live to righteousness by whose stripes you were healed For you were as sheep going astray but are now returned to the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls Likewise women …[be] in subjection to your own men that if any obey not the Word they also may without the Word be won by the behavior of the women.” END QUOTE

 Peter certainly made a seamless connection when writing about the subjection of slaves to masters and the subjection of women to their men. This is confirmed in 1 Peter 3:5-6 where he wrote that Sara called Abraham master. Nowhere do we read in scripture where Sarah called Abraham master, so this statement must be taken from the Jewish extra-scriptural writings. These writings are commentary and not inspired scripture, but Peter was obviously familiar with them.

 19^th Century Greek and Hebrew scholar, Katherine Bushnell did not believe women are scripturally commanded to subject themselves to male dominance on any level. But she also believed that 1 Peter 3:1 was connected with 1 Peter 2:18 and she had this to say about it she began with the Hebrew and then show how the Greek [in 1 Peter] connected with it: QUOTE “The Old Testament sense in which "to be in subjection" is sometimes used, is highly suggestive and instructive. Psalm 62:1 reads in the English, "truly my soul waiteth upon God; from Him cometh my salvation.” At verse 5 of the same Psalm, we read: "My soul, wait thou only upon God.” In Psalm 37:7 we find the words: "Rest in the Lord and wait patiently for Him.” The words "wait" in the first passages, and the word "rest" in the last are all three represented in the Greek version by the single word hupotasso, "be in subjection," while the literal sense of the Hebrew original word is "be silent unto.” Compare this with 1 Peter 3:1,2, where wives are exhorted to win unbelieving husbands by "subjection.” Surely Peter is not here exhorting wives to blindly obey unbelievers, for if heathen, they would at once remand them back to the worship of the gods; if Jews, back to Judaism. Rather, they are to win them away from these by their "manner of life,” “without The Word,"--actions speaking louder than words. "Coupled with fear,"—such fear of God as would cause these women, so gentle, quiet, and patient in daily life, to be as adamant in their truth to God; and the husbands so overawed by their quiet maintenance of principle, whereas they are so ready to yield to their husbands when principle is not involved, that the husbands dare not try to compel their wives to violate conscience, and thus are themselves gradually led into the Christian faith. Where “subjection” is spoken of as a woman’s duty, without further immediate specification, it has been too readily assumed that this means subjection to a husband. But many women even from Apostolic days, and certainly an increasing large proportion of women in latter days, have no husbands. In both 1 Corinthians 14:34, “let them be in subjection”; and in 1 Timothy 2:11, “learn in all subjection,” this O. T. idea of waiting on God, or the thought of a spirit of humility towards God, may be all that is intended.” END QUOTE

 ANOTHER VIEW

The biblical writer’s direction to slaves and women were not biblical condonements of institutionalized slavery or systemically-mandated female subjection to males, but this writer believes the instruction found 1 peter 2:18 and 1 Peter 3:1 stem from concern for the safety of both.

 It was taught then that all Christians [slaves, women, and men] were spiritually free in Christ, and all Christians [then and now] are equal ^{Galatians 3:28,1 Peter 5:5}, but depending on geographic location and local and national laws, all were, and are, not entitled to the same legal autonomy. While earth-bound, Roman slaves and women were still confined by oppressive laws and cultural expectations. That is still the case in many parts of the world today. 1 Peter 2 & 3 was both instruction and encouragement that a godly lifestyle in freely subjecting oneself to an unfortunate legally-mandated lot would not only *keep slaves safer but also was not un-noticed by God and would not go unrewarded. Women were higher on the social and legal scales than slaves, but their autonomy was still greatly restricted, and they were maliciously written about by philosophers, playwrights, and poets of the day. Though enjoying more legal protections, by the first century, domestic violence was still a very real part of Roman and Jewish life and first century Christian women were certainly at risk.

 *Throughout Roman history, slaves could be killed at will by masters with no repercussion. By the time of Christ, manus marriage, which entitled Roman husbands to arbitrarily kill wives was replaced by sine manu marriage, whereby married women remained under the protection of their pater-families or of a male guardian appointed by their pater-families. This made the murder wives [with little to no legal or social repercussion] much more difficult. But domestic violence and abuse was another subject altogether. The Romans from Augustus on, liked to appear fair and gentle in public by passing some very good laws favoring women, but one Greek/Roman historian lamented that literary writings on the subject of domestic abuse and domestic violence [in the late republic] is frustratingly quiet. In other words, domestic abuse was winked at and swept under the rug.

 Domestic violence and abuse are a given in any society that considers women as inferior or lesser than men. Virtually all the Church Fathers, considered women inferior and dangerous if given autonomy. They repeat this often in their writings. These same Church Fathers continue to be studied extensively today, as they should but with their anti-women rhetoric refuted in Christian seminaries, but it is not. It is simply ignored.

 Gender-bias in Bible translation is rampant and creates a perceived scripture-bias against women where none exists. Holy Spirit inspired biblical writers do not exhibit such bias, but this is difficult to see when modern translators insist on holding to historical and traditional attitudes that are harmful to women. Even today, with progressive laws, three women a day [in the United States] die from domestic violence. A Methodist survey done in the 1970’s, found that one in six Christian women experienced violence at the hands of husbands or boyfriends. Domestic violence among professing Christians is just as rampant as among unbelievers. Why would anyone assume that First Century women were not at even greater risk when misogyny was the systemically-legal order of the day and the norm for their culture? 

Cultures exist today, where Christians are both legally enslaved and women are literally slaves of their husbands. Many of these women must hide their faith in Christ. They would not in any case be able to speak of Christ or share his Word with their husbands, who are literally and legally their masters. Many have zero legal recourse against abuse or potentially deadly domestic violence. They must, of necessity endure the harshness and danger, with seemingly no hope of escape. Just as 1 Peter 2:18 is not a message to Christian slaves that institutionalized slavery is God’s will, 1 Peter 3:2 is not a message to Christian women that God created them as inferiors to men or that it is his will for them tolerate violence and abuse. It was a message intended to protect [as much as possible] and encourage slaves and at-risk women of every era.

 [2] ^{1 Peter 3:2} It is interesting that the Bible is full of admonitions to “fear not,” yet wives are told to fear husbands twice in the New Testament. In Ephesians 5:33, the word translated as reverence, literally translates as fear.  

 [3] ^{1 Peter 3:4} Meekness, which should never be mistaken for weakness, is for all Christians, not just women. Moses, the most powerful man among the Hebrews, was called the meekest man on earth ^{Matthew 5:5}.

 [4] ^{1 Peter 3:6} It is thought that Sarah and Abraham lived in or around the time of the “progressive” king, Hammurabi. Among other things, Hammurabi’s law permitted men to divorce wives who did not bear children. Men in every culture of the time were legally masters over their women.

 [5] ^{1 Peter 3:7} Might does not make right

 [6] ^{1 Peter 3:7} Though this verse speaks specifically to husbands, the prayers of anyone male or female, married or unmarried, will be hindered when we throw our strength around, oppressing those who are weaker than us.

 Of note is the fact that most Christians have heard 1 Peter 3:1 quoted or preached on many times during their lives, with 1 Peter 3:7 occasionally thrown in as an after-thought. There is no doubt the priority of traditional-role-religion and its more virulent offspring, complementarianism, has been to keep the influence and autonomy of Christian women to a minimum.

[7] ^{1 Peter 3:17} This passage [beginning with verse 1] has been taken out of context and used for millennia in forcing or guilting Christian women to remain in abusive relationships. Read my commentary on 1 Peter 3:1: Jocelyn Andersen: 1 Peter 3:1 Does not mandate female subordination or male headship.

Revelation 1 commentary

     

        1: The Revelation ^apokalypsis [1] [of] Jesus Christ that THE GOD[2] is causing to come forth He shows [to] his servants ^{Amos 3:7, Isaiah 42:9} what must come to pass in a speedy manner[3] and he sent to make it known[4] by his messenger[5] to his bondsman John 

 

Quick Take on Verse One:

The Revelation in an unveiling. It is things made clear. It is not a cryptic book, but rather the unsealing of things that were previously hidden from understanding

 For detailed study of each verse, see end-notes

 

2: Who testified the Word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ and all things that he saw 

 

Quick Take on Verse Two:

John saw these things. This is a vision, not a dream

 

3: Blessed are they that read and they that hear the words of this prophecy and hold fast to the things which are described in it For the [pre-appointed] ^{Daniel 8:19, Acts 1:7} season is near[6]  

 

 

 

4: John to the Seven[7] Called-Out [8] who are in Asia Grace be to you and peace from HIM WHO IS [alive] and WHO WAS [dead] and WHO IS TO COME [coming again] and from the Seven Spirits which are before his throne[9] 5: Indeed from Jesus Christ [the] FAITHFUL WITNESS [the] FIRST BEGOTTEN FROM THE DEAD and THE PRINCE OF THE KINGS OF THE EARTH Unto him who loved us and washed us from our sins in his own blood[10] 6: And has made us kings and priests [11] unto God and his Father [12] To him be glory and dominion eons of eons Amen 7: Behold he comes with clouds[13] and every eye shall see him and they also which pierced him and all families of the earth shall wail because of him[14] Even so Amen 8: I am ALPHA AND OMEGA THE BEGINNING AND THE ENDING [15] saith the Lord WHO IS and WHO WAS and WHO IS TO COME THE ALMIGHTY[16] 9: I John who also am your brother and companion in tribulation and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ was in the isle that is called Patmos for the Word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ 10: I was in THE DAY [of the] LORD by the Spirit[17] and heard behind me a great voice as of a trumpet 11: Saying I am ALPHA AND OMEGA THE FIRST AND THE LAST and what you see write into scrolls and send it unto the seven Called-Out which are in Asia[18] ^{Acts 16:6, 19:10 & 27, 20:4}  to Ephesus ^{[located in Turkey close to Selcuk]} and to Smyrna ^{[city of Izmir located in Turkey]} and to Pergamos ^{[ruins located in Turkey]} and unto Thyatira ^{[city of Akhisar in Turkey]} and to Sardis ^{[town of Sart in Turkey]} and to Philadelphia ^{[was a city of Lydia located in Turkey]} and to Laodicea ^{[city of Denizli in Turkey]} 12: And I turned to see the voice that spake with me And being turned I saw seven golden lampstands 13: And in the midst of the seven lampstands one like unto the SON OF MAN clothed with a garment down to the foot and fastened towards the chest was a golden belt 14: His head and his hairs were white like wool as white as snow and his eyes were as a blaze of fire 15: And his feet like brilliant copper as in burner having been fired ^scrTR and his voice as the sound of many waters 16: And he had in his right hand seven stars and out of his mouth went a sharp two-edged sword and his countenance was as the sun shines in its strength 17: And when I saw him I fell at his feet as dead And he laid his right hand upon me saying to me Fear not I [Jesus] am THE FIRST AND THE LAST 18: I am HE THAT LIVES AND WAS DEAD and behold I am alive for evermore Amen and have the keys of hadēs and of death 19: Write the things which you have seen and the things which are and the things which shall come to pass [and] follow after ^{Revelation 4:1} 20: [This is] the mystery of the seven stars which you saw in my right hand and the seven golden lampstands The seven stars are the messengers[19] of the seven Called-Out and the seven lampstands that you saw are the seven Called-Out ^{Matthew 5:13-16, All seven are located in what is now modern-day Turkey}

---

[1] The Greek word, apokalypsis [from which the English word, apocalypse, is derived], carries a very different connotation from that which most English speaking peoples connect with it. Apokalypsis, means the revealing, the unveiling, things made clear, used of events by which things [or states or persons] that were previously withdrawn from view are now made visible to all. The actual definition of the word, apokalypsis, (as opposed to popular notions) should lay to rest the idea that The Revelation is meant to be a cryptic book impossible to understand. It is meant to be understood. And to underscore this, a blessing is promised to those who take the time to read (and take to heart) the words of the prophecy contained in Apokalypsis. 

(Subscribe to Jocelyn Andersen on YouTube)

[2] Most references to “God” in the New Testament are to Jehovah [YHWH]—the Godhead ^{Acts 17:29, Romans 1:20, Colossians 2:9}. Jesus is God.

[3] “But beloved be not ignorant of this one thing that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day” ^{2 Peter 3:8}. Another way to look at this verse, is that when the events revealed to John begin to happen, It will be suddenly and things will move very fast. This is confirmed by Jesus in Matthew 24:14-22.

[4] The Revelation contains four types of language: 1.) Literal. John’s descriptions of what he sees in Heaven are to be taken literally, as should some [if not all] of the spiritual phenomena he describes 2.) Figurative. This language is defined within the context of passage 3.) Symbolic. All symbols in The Revelation are unlocked and defined somewhere within the volume of scriptures) 4.) First-Century Descriptive, which should generally be taken as literal. John saw things not yet invented in the first century and thus described these things as best he knew how, using only the vocabulary and terms which were available to him in the first century (e.g., how would someone in the 1960’s have described a cell phone or a drone?).

[5] This was not an angel John conversed with. Revelation 22:8-9, shows the messenger to be one of John’s brethren the prophets. The messenger was a fellow human who must have already passed on, perhaps even a martyr. It is not spiritism [which scripture forbids] when God is the one who initiates the contact between mortals and those no longer in mortal bodies. And we must remember, this was all seen in a vision.

[6] Some might relate this “brief space of time” to the Young Earth/Old Earth controversy. But whether the time-span leading up to the beginning of the Latter Days [which began 2000 years ago on the Day of Pentecost ^{Acts 2:16-17a}] is only thousands of years as opposed to billions of years, God’s infinite view of what is “near” is very different from what our finite view of “near at hand” might be.

[7] Throughout the Bible, the number seven is seen as the number of completion, perfection, the totality of something (we see this regarding the seven spirits before the Throne of God in verse :4). In the Revelation, we see messages addressed to seven specific assemblies in Asia, even so, it has been understood by scholars of every age [and every denominational persuasion or lack thereof] that the messages in Revelation 1-3,  are two-fold: 1.) They are intended for those they are specifically addressed to and 2.) also for the entire Body of Christ throughout all ages.

[8] The English word “church” is translated from the Greek compound word ek-klesia. Ek, is a root word meaning out or from and klesia comes from the root word, kaleō meaning to call or invite. Every individual who has been Born-Again, is called/invited out of darkness/death and translated into light/life. The Children of Light—collectively—compose the Called-Out [assembly] of The Redeemed, also called the Body of Christ ^{Ephesians 1:22-23}

[9] Isaiah 11:2, “And the spirit of the LORD^[1] shall rest upon him the spirit of wisdom^[2] and understanding^[3] the spirit of counsel^[4] and might^[5] the spirit of knowledge^[6] and of the fear of the LORD^[7]” 

(Subscribe to Jocelyn Andersen on YouTube)

[10] Acts 20:28 ^[TR] confirms that the ALMIGHTY purchased HIS  Church with HIS OWN BLOOD. Jesus is God

[11] Complementarianism claims husbands will present wives to Christ at the Judgement and that husbands will answer for the behavior of wives at the judgement, and that wives who were submissive to husbands will not be held responsible to God for their sins if in the process of sinning they were obeying their husbands (this doctrine turns husbands into mediators when the Bible says there is only one mediator between God and humanity). If complementarian theology is correct, then the doctrine of the Priesthood of all believers is false and only male believers will be priests and kings before God. The problem with this, is that even complementarian theology [as a general rule] teaches that the priesthood of believers includes all believers regardless of sex. So which is it? Because we can not have it both ways.

[12] Verses 6-8 reveal not only that Jesus is Almighty God, but these verses also reveal the GODHEAD, which is a tri-unity [as opposed to a tri-ad]. The one who is the ALMIGHTY is the same one WHO WAS DEAD AND IS ALIVE AND IS COMING AGAIN. Jesus is God. Can we fully comprehend the Being that is our God, and the fact that he reveals himself in three distinct persons—one of which (the Holy Spirit) is always referred to in the Hebrew scriptures in the feminine form—RuWacH EloHYiM? In the Greek, the Holy Spirit is never referred to as “He.” The neutral word “autos” is always used when referencing the Holy Spirit. The Godhead is a triune being—not a human.

“Hear O Israel The Lord our God is ONE God.” Jesus is God. Jesus is Jehovah. And since Jehovah [YHWH] is ONE, there is no hierarchy within Godhead. It is interesting to note that those who teach gender-based hierarchy, subordinate the one member of the Godhead who is a physical male to another member of the Godhead who is portrayed as male, while the one member of the Godhead who is consistently portrayed as female is not subordinated to the male member ^Jesus. This is a contradiction that no one can explain. The reason that it is unexplainable, is because there is no hierarchy within the Godhead and efforts to produce one always result in unexplainable contradictions. 

[13] Both Daniel and Jesus, establish that this verse speaks to the 2^nd Coming and not the Rapture  ^{Daniel 7:13, Matthew  24:30, 26:64, Mark 14:62}.

[14] This is a reference to Zechariah 12:9-12, which gives details on Isaiah’s prophecy in 66:5-9 that in one day, a nation (the Jewish nation) would be born [again].

[15] The word ELOHIYM, in Genesis 1:1 is followed by the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet, and remain untranslated in virtually every Bible. A possible rendering of Genesis 1:1 is, “In the beginning ELOHIYM ^{אֱלֹהִים} the FIRST LAST ^אֵת created…”

[16] Verses 4-5, 8-9, 12, and 17, leave no question that Jesus is Jehovah. The Alpha and Omega--the Almighty—is the same one who “was” (died), “is” (now lives again), and “is to come” (coming again). 

[17] THE LORD’S DAY is not the same as the Sabbath. The Sabbath is the 7^th Day of the Week (and includes Holy Days which may or may not fall on the 7^th day). However, Larkin suggests that John is not, here, referring to any set day of the week but rather was projected into the time of end—into The Day of the Lord ^{Isaiah 2:10-21, 13:6-17, Joel 2:15-20}. Notwithstanding, THE LORD’S DAY is observed by Christians on the 1^st Day of the Week. The Feast of the LORD, First Fruits (which prophetically foretold the Resurrection of Christ), always falls on the 1^st Day of the week, which is the day Jesus rose from the dead. The earliest Christians began immediately gathering on the first day of the week because that, and because they likely recognized what the very first FIRST FRUITS after the crucifixion represented. This does not mean that they forsook the Sabbath, because most were Jews, but all were not. Luke the Beloved Physician who gave us the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts, was not a Jew. Paul’s addressed the matter of dietary laws and the Sabbath to the believers in Rome in his letter to them: Romans 14 One esteems one day above another another esteems every day alike Let every one be fully persuaded in their own minds They that regard the day regard it to the Lord and they that regard not the day to the Lord they do not regard it They that eat, eat to the Lord for they give God thanks and they that eat not to the Lord they eat not and give God thanks…whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s.” 

[18] All of the called-out [assemblies] mentioned in Revelation chapter one were/are located in what is now, modern-day Turkey.

[19] The messengers of the seven Called-out [assemblies] are not Heavenly beings (angels). Jesus is not giving a vision and instructing a man to write what he sees and send the message to angels. Indeed, how could that even be possible for John? That leaves only one other option. The stars that Jesus is holding in his hand—the seven messengers of the Called-out [assemblies]—are human messengers. It is interesting that Jesus did not specify what ministry gift or church office these messengers might hold. The ministry gifts given to equip the Body of Christ to grow in Christ, win souls, and make disciples include apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers. It is presumptuous to assume that it is pastors who are the messengers represented by the stars held in Jesus’ hand. They could be. But why not the apostles, prophets, or evangelists? Not a single word of scripture attests to the claims of some that these ministry gifts passed away with the early Church, and these are all defined as messengers. Whereas strictly defined, pastors are shepherds—not messengers. We propose that it is the false perception of priest-craft and mediatorship that has become so deeply rooted within the Christian psyche, that God’s people are led astray in ascribing almost supreme leadership privileges to pastors. This myopic error has the effect of replacing the work, leading, and calling of the Holy Spirit in dictating—largely through pastors—what God has or has not called his people to do.  The ministry of the Holy Spirit through the Gifts of the Spirit and the priesthood of believers is systematically being choked out of many churches through a deliberate hierarchical bottle-neck where everything is required to flow through the office of pastor, to the neglect and dismissal of every other gift and calling within congregations.

 https://womansubmit.blogspot.com/2012/02/submission-final-arbiter.html

       

  Additional commentary pending for this chapter

Did you find this post helpful? Help others find it 

Link to it and share with connections on social media

 

Do you have the assurance of knowing that if you died today, you have Eternal Life?