Who created all things: God or the Son?

[Sargonski]

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT??? What is this stuff about "Lord Martin"?

Martin Luther -- aka "Lord Martin" is the source of your Salvation formulation - the generalized version known as "Sola Fide" in Latin - Salvation by Faith Alone .. which perhaps explains why you did not know the name of the God who's word you were Worshiping.

We say Lord Jesus -- those of us that hear "The Word" the word which is God .. God's word -- and through this word we believe is the Truth, the light .. the way - the path to salvation.

Just as Lord Jesus is our Word of God .. Lord Martin is your Word of God .. following a path to salvation based on "The Word" of Lord Martin rather than that of Lord Jesus...

Now .. if one follows the word of Lord Jesus .. one then follows the God of Jesus -- as the word ofd Jesus IS Gods Word ..
If one follows the the word of Martin Luther .. then one is following Lord Martin's God .. which ever God that is .. which you don't know -- unable to tell us this God's name or identify this God (this Gods Word) in the Bible.

The followers of Lord Marty by en large believe that their God is YHWH - but this makes no sense as they follow not "The Word" of this God .. and her-in lies a deception .. the tracks of the beast now visible in the snow ..

The True path is not found by the word of of Lord Marty .. nor from the command of Jealous .. the name of another God in the Bible you don't know .. this your likely suspect for God of Marty more than YHWH .. but that is another story .. The point being is that regardless of what God the Path of Lord Martin leads to .. it is not the God of Jesus .. nor "The Word" of Jesus .. not the Truth the way , the light.

 

[jimb]

Martin Luther -- aka "Lord Martin" is the source of your Salvation formulation - the generalized version known as "Sola Fide" in Latin - Salvation by Faith Alone .. which perhaps explains why you did not know the name of the God who's word you were Worshiping.

We say Lord Jesus -- those of us that hear "The Word" the word which is God .. God's word -- and through this word we believe is the Truth, the light .. the way - the path to salvation.

Just as Lord Jesus is our Word of God .. Lord Martin is your Word of God .. following a path to salvation based on "The Word" of Lord Martin rather than that of Lord Jesus...

Now .. if one follows the word of Lord Jesus .. one then follows the God of Jesus -- as the word ofd Jesus IS Gods Word ..
If one follows the the word of Martin Luther .. then one is following Lord Martin's God .. which ever God that is .. which you don't know -- unable to tell us this God's name or identify this God (this Gods Word) in the Bible.

The followers of Lord Marty by en large believe that their God is YHWH - but this makes no sense as they follow not "The Word" of this God .. and her-in lies a deception .. the tracks of the beast now visible in the snow ..

The True path is not found by the word of of Lord Marty .. nor from the command of Jealous .. the name of another God in the Bible you don't know .. this your likely suspect for God of Marty more than YHWH .. but that is another story .. The point being is that regardless of what God the Path of Lord Martin leads to .. it is not the God of Jesus .. nor "The Word" of Jesus .. not the Truth the way , the light.

Are you okay? I have never hear of "Lord Martin" (which I consider blasphemous). I appropriately say "Lord Jesus".

And claiming that "Lord Martin is your Word of God" is blasphemous also.

Why do you use a term that is clearly blasphemous, denigrating the Lord Jesus? Do you think your blasphemy is funny?

Finally, your English shows that you are semi-literate. I am not surprised.

I am putting you and your blasphemy on "ignore".

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read my signature below, which clearly applies to you.

 

[Trailblazer]

I am putting you and your blasphemy on "ignore".

Another poster who disagrees with @jimb goes on "ignore."

Read my signature below, which clearly applies to you.

Read the verses below, which clearly apply to you.

Matthew 7:3-5 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

 

[Sargonski]

Are you okay? I have never hear of "Lord Martin" (which I consider blasphemous). I appropriately say "Lord Jesus".

And claiming that "Lord Martin is your Word of God" is blasphemous also.

Why do you use a term that is clearly blasphemous, denigrating the Lord Jesus? Do you think your blasphemy is funny?

Finally, your English shows that you are semi-literate. I am not surprised.

I am putting you and your blasphemy on "ignore".

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read my signature below, which clearly applies to you.

You are saying you have never heard of Martin Luther ? but his dogma your salvation formullation, and apparently for some reason don't realize this ? and then you call me Semi -Literate" and accuse me of blasphemy .. when is you who is putting words in the mouth of Lord Jesus .. not me doing the blasphemy against the spirit .. this is another one of those .. .log out of own eye moments.

 

[Sargonski]

Another poster who disagrees with @jimb goes on "ignore."

Read the verses below, which clearly apply to you.

Matthew 7:3-5 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

Exactly - going around preaching "Sola Fide" --- the doctrine which separates the Protesters from the Catholic and Orthodox .. the Church founded by Martin Luther .. but says has no idea who Martin Luther is .. after me telling him Lord Martin .. is Martin Luther in previous post ?

Then calls me "Sub Literate" .. and a blasphemer . for explaining to him where the dogma he has been preaching comes from .. this man made Dogma he wishes to substitute for the word Jesus--- and I am the one engaging in blasphemy.

Something strange going on .. like a thought stopping reaction triggered.... deflect from the "Bad thoughts" at any cost .. not sure if you are familiar with destructive cult mind control tactics - where shrewd indoctrinators implant these triggers into the subconscious of the adherent. I wont get into it but it is fascinating .. from time to time you come across certain patters of behavoir . both in religious and non religious topics that this person may have ingested some spiked kool-aid. They just want to make the bad thought go away .. and the cult leader teaches a wide variety of thought stopping techniques the adherent can use when triggered .. the adherents when triggered subconsiously .. will automaticly begin to use these thought stopping techniques .. but somewhat unaware of why they are doing this.

Had a very interesting experience one time with a Hari Krishna -- having a very good conversation .. both enjoying the convo .. but was slowly backing the fellow into logical corner with my questions. .. then . when the fellow got stuck .. was like some kind of light bulb went off .. one second I was having perfectly normal conversation . the next thing this fellow us up dancing around .. chanting Hari Hari, Rama Rama ,, Krishna Krishna .. and so on. I am standing there stunned .. thinking what the hell was that ... was later I studied cult mind control when a very close friend of mine was taken into one of these Fundamentalist Christian Cults .. thats a story for another day.

 

[jimb]

Another poster who disagrees with @jimb goes on "ignore."

Read the verses below, which clearly apply to you.

Matthew 7:3-5 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

What kind of archaic English is that? For example, "beholdest thou the mote" and "cast the mote out of thy brother's eye". Why don't you post in conventional English?

BTW, what is wrong with putting people on "ignore"? There are a number of people who just post inflammatory nonsense, so why should I pay attention to them?

Finally,...

"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

“Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces." Matthew 7:3-6

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Another poster who disagrees with @jimb goes on "ignore."

Read the verses below, which clearly apply to you.

Matthew 7:3-5 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

Well said, in my opinion.

 

[jimb]

Well said, in my opinion.

Thank you. I'm glad you agree with my post #226.

 

[Trailblazer]

What kind of archaic English is that? For example, "beholdest thou the mote" and "cast the mote out of thy brother's eye". Why don't you post in conventional English?

Matthew 7:3-5​

Easy-to-Read Version​

3 “Why do you notice the small piece of dust that is in your friend’s eye, but you don’t notice the big piece of wood that is in your own? 4 Why do you say to your friend, ‘Let me take that piece of dust out of your eye’? Look at yourself first! You still have that big piece of wood in your own eye. 5 You are a hypocrite! First, take the wood out of your own eye. Then you will see clearly to get the dust out of your friend’s eye.

That was the easiest to read Bible translation I could find. Do you understand what it means?

BTW, what is wrong with putting people on "ignore"? There are a number of people who just post inflammatory nonsense, so why should I pay attention to them?

I did not say that there is anything 'wrong' with putting people on ignore. That is your choice.
Why should people listen to your inflammatory nonsense?

Finally,...

"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

“Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces." Matthew 7:3-6

I see that as usual you did not reply to the verses that were posted to you.
Instead, you deflected away from them and posted a verse that is totally unrelated to the verses I posted.

To make a long story short, you cannot see the plank in your own eye, only the plank that 'you believe' is in the eyes of others.

I have the perfect verses for you. They were made to order.

26: O SON OF BEING! How couldst thou forget thine own faults and busy thyself with the faults of others? Whoso doeth this is accursed of Me.
The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 10

66: O EMIGRANTS! The tongue I have designed for the mention of Me, defile it not with detraction. If the fire of self overcome you, remember your own faults and not the faults of My creatures, inasmuch as every one of you knoweth his own self better than he knoweth others.
The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 45

 

[TrueBeliever37]

I understand. He will reign forever in the sense that when all is in subjection to the Son, he will hand everything over to the (his) Father so that God may be all in all. In perfect harmony and wonderful existence. Offhand I can't remember the exact scripture that tells me that, but if you'd like I can find it. thanks.

Those verses are referring to mankind handing this earthly kingdom back over to the Father. God has temporarily allowed man to have dominion over the earth he had created. When he returns, man will no longer be able to make choices like he does now. There will be the judgement of mankind, and time shall be no more. Our eternal destiny will be based on how we have lived this life.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

That is true for the OT -- the name YHWH in the text was translated from Hebrew to English as Lord by convention .. an unfortunate mistranslation as far as I am concerned but this is not the case in New Testament scripture where the Name YHWH is never used as a personal name for "The Father" The word in Greek used for "The Father" is Patri = The Father . Patri is not the personal name YHWH in Greek .. nor is that the term used for God in the Greek text.

but this matters not ... as the redactors of the Bible in the second temple period defaulted to uisng the Name YHWH for God in older text .. for example in Genesis during the time of Abraham .. prior to anyone ever knowing the name YHWH .. we find YHWH cropping up as a name for God in some places .. where in other places we have all kinds of other epithets for the God EL .. including the EL used directly.

EL was the God of Abraham and the Patriarchs . EL Elyon ---- God Most High , El Shaddai (high god of the mountain / twin peaks) and epithet for the Canaanite High God EL. El Oliun God Supreme .. who can't be YHWH because YHWH later shows up in in Heaven with EL in Psalm 82 .. along with a number of the other Sons of God.

The cult of YHWH starts with Moses -- Moses does not know of any God YHWH prior to meeting while spending 40 years with the midianites .. this God known as Yahu of the Shasu in Egyptian texts. YHWH was worshiped along side his wife Asherah with numerous other Gods in the various temples dedicated to him throughout the land .. at no time are the Israelites ever Monotheists. Monotheism does not come until after YHWH's death with the invention of Judaism in Persia ..adopting monotheistic beliefs from the Persians.

The God of Judaism -- what ever name you wish to give this God .. is not the OT God YHWH .. but that is a story for another post.

Jesus is the Logos .. and the Word Was God .. Logos can mean word but in a religious context means emissary between man and God .. Jesus was thus the physical representation of God's word .. and God's word .. as far as humans are concerned IS GOD. Thus the various commands in the bible is that God ..

For example .. we have one God in the NT named Jealous .. who gives a completely different 10 commands than the God who gives the 10 commands that you are normally familar with. This is a different God speaking.

We know Jesus is not YHWH .. he can not be the Logos of YHWH .. because he is not preaching the commands of YHWH - which lead to salvation. Jesus gives a set of commands completely different that the YHWH path to salvation.

Further -- we are told that Jesus is a priest of the order Melchi-Zedek (which blows trinity doctrine out of the water) Zedek was the Patron God of Jerusalem back in Abraham's day .. and also when David takes the "City of Peace" .. the Kings name at that time was Adoni-Zedek "My God is Zedek".

Rather than killing all the inhabitants and stringing the pagan canaanite priests up from the highest branch.. David himself is ordained a priest in the order of Melchi-Zedek.

The God of this Priestly Order is not YHWH .. but EL. King Solomon is not ordained by a Levite Priest .. he is ordained by a priest named Zadok .. a Jebusite and High Priest of the Canaanite city of Jerusalem prior to David taking over.

The God of the Order of the Priesthood of Zedek is EL . not YHWH.

When a NT verse is quoting an OT verse, and the OT verse said YHWH then that's what would have originally been in the NT verse. The fact is they substituted other words for God's name. But at least we have a heads up in the OT by having LORD or GOD in all caps in most of the places.

 

[jimb]

Those verses are referring to mankind handing this earthly kingdom back over to the Father. God has temporarily allowed man to have dominion over the earth he had created. When he returns, man will no longer be able to make choices like he does now. There will be the judgement of mankind, and time shall be no more. Our eternal destiny will be based on how we have lived this life.

1 Corinthians 15:20-28, "But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead also came through a man. For just as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ, the firstfruits; then when Christ comes, those who belong to him. Then comes the end,[p] when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, when he has brought to an end all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be eliminated is death. For he has put everything in subjection under his feet. But when it says “everything” has been put in subjection, it is clear that this does not include the one who put everything in subjection to him. And when all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will be subjected to the one who subjected everything to him, so that God may be all in all.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

1 Corinthians 15:20-28, "But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead also came through a man. For just as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ, the firstfruits; then when Christ comes, those who belong to him. Then comes the end,[p] when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, when he has brought to an end all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be eliminated is death. For he has put everything in subjection under his feet. But when it says “everything” has been put in subjection, it is clear that this does not include the one who put everything in subjection to him. And when all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will be subjected to the one who subjected everything to him, so that God may be all in all.

The "he" in those verses is man and his descendants. The translators capitalized Son making it look like it is referring to the Messiah. It's actually referring to the descendants of man (or the son of man).

First of all if it was referring to the Messiah then it would be in conflict with many other scriptures that say he will rule forever, and that there is no end to his kingdom.

2nd - The Messiah has already conquered all his enemies. The last enemy was death, and he has already conquered death. So if it was talking about him then he would have already handed the kingdom over and no longer be reigning.

Genesis lets us know that God put man over his earthly creation. Man can do as he pleases now. He can make choices good or bad. When God returns man will give up that authority. He will no longer be able to do as he pleases. We will be judged at that time.

Psalms 8:3-8 further backs this up, that it is talking about mankind.

 

[jimb]

The "he" in those verses is man and his descendants. The translators capitalized Son making it look like it is referring to the Messiah. It's actually referring to the descendants of man (or the son of man).

First of all if it was referring to the Messiah then it would be in conflict with many other scriptures that say he will rule forever, and that there is no end to his kingdom.

2nd - The Messiah has already conquered all his enemies. The last enemy was death, and he has already conquered death. So if it was talking about him then he would have already handed the kingdom over and no longer be reigning.

Genesis lets us know that God put man over his earthly creation. Man can do as he pleases now. He can make choices good or bad. When God returns man will give up that authority. He will no longer be able to do as he pleases. We will be judged at that time.

Psalms 8:3-8 further backs this up, that it is talking about mankind.

LOL!

"Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father". So, "man and his descendants" will actually rule God's kingdom in the end??? What role does Jesus play?

"For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be eliminated is death". So, "man and his descendants" eliminate death? Seriously?

And then you make this preposterous statement: "The translators capitalized Son making it look like it is referring to the Messiah." I guess you know better than the scholars who created the Bible what the source language -- Koine Greek -- and the Christian doctrine really are.

Finally, Psalm 8 refers to the fact that God has given humanity the primary position in all His creation, but humanity are people, not gods.

Why don't you read the Bible more carefully? And while you're at it, think about what it clearly says about Jesus' rule, not mankind's rule.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why don't you read the Bible more carefully? And while you're at it, think about what it clearly says about Jesus' rule, not mankind's rule.

Why don't you read the Bible more carefully? And while you're at it, think about what it clearly says about Jesus returning to this world.

Jesus never promised to return to earth, not once in the New Testament. Jesus said His work was finished here and He was no more in the world. That means that the return of Christ has to be another Person.

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

John 16:10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more.

John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

Jesus never claimed to be a king, and He never said He was coming back to earth to rule.
None of this is in the NT. It is all a man-made Christian doctrine.

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

John 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

These two verses in John 18 completely negate that Jesus is the King of this world or that Jesus will ever come to this world to rule it, and they fit perfectly together with John 17:4 and John 17:11. Jesus came into this world to bear witness unto the truth about God. He did that so there is no more reason for Jesus to come back to this world again. That is why Jesus said “I am no more in the world.”

 

[YoursTrue]

Those verses are referring to mankind handing this earthly kingdom back over to the Father. God has temporarily allowed man to have dominion over the earth he had created. When he returns, man will no longer be able to make choices like he does now. There will be the judgement of mankind, and time shall be no more. Our eternal destiny will be based on how we have lived this life.

Man will make better choices than those he is making now, that's for sure.

 

[YoursTrue]

Those verses are referring to mankind handing this earthly kingdom back over to the Father.

They are? I don't see that in the scriptures. 1 Corinthians 15:28 says (I use various translations to get the point across...) that the Son will be in subjection to the One that gave him, the Son, authority.

New International Version
When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.
New Living Translation
Then, when all things are under his authority, the Son will put himself under God’s authority, so that God, who gave his Son authority over all things, will be utterly supreme over everything everywhere.

 

[Sargonski]

When a NT verse is quoting an OT verse, and the OT verse said YHWH then that's what would have originally been in the NT verse. The fact is they substituted other words for God's name. But at least we have a heads up in the OT by having LORD or GOD in all caps in most of the places.

Yes .. that is interesting that they use the proper name in the OT Hebrew .. but it is clear where they substituted Lord for YHWH so we still know.

In the NT--- YHWH is never stated as the God of Jesus ... the identity of "The Father" is just assumed by Christians to be YHWH .. but this is not the case .. and we know this for a number of reasons

1) Jesus is "The Logos" -- a term mistranslated in John 1 as "Word" "and the Word Was God" .. Right Jesus is the physical representation of God's Word ..

If - The Word - is God .. and thus YHWH's commands are YHWH .. then if Jesus was the Physical representation of YHWH's commands .. Then he would follow them ---- But he does not .. violating a number of YHWH's commands.

Who is "The Father of the Pharisees" ? The Devil says Jesus .. the Demiurge as some of the early Christians like to call it .. This is not the Father of Jesus ..

Then there are other Gods in the OT-- different God .. Different Commands .. we have one God says "Kill the child for the sins of Father" - We have nother says "Do not kill the child for the Sins of the Father -- each is to be punished according to their own sin"

Which God you gonna follow .. how many variations of the 10 commandments do we have ? from different Gods .. for example .. the God named Jealous ... completely different 10 Commands from the other God's 10 Commands.

2) We are told that Jesus is not the God Supreme .. El Oliun .. but a priest of the Most High God .. Jesus is a priest forever of the Order MelchiZedek - This is not the Aaronic Priesthood of YHWH .. this is a priesthood of the Order Melch-Zedek The Zedokite priesthood ks not the Aaronic priesthood.

So .. we have come to the thinking cap part of the program Who is the God of the Order Melchi-Zedek ? Hint -- Zedek is the Patron God of Jerusalem at the time of Abraham -- but Zedek is not God Supreme .. not the God of this Priestly order.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

LOL!

"Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father". So, "man and his descendants" will actually rule God's kingdom in the end??? What role does Jesus play?

"For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be eliminated is death". So, "man and his descendants" eliminate death? Seriously?

And then you make this preposterous statement: "The translators capitalized Son making it look like it is referring to the Messiah." I guess you know better than the scholars who created the Bible what the source language -- Koine Greek -- and the Christian doctrine really are.

Finally, Psalm 8 refers to the fact that God has given humanity the primary position in all His creation, but humanity are people, not gods.

Why don't you read the Bible more carefully? And while you're at it, think about what it clearly says about Jesus' rule, not mankind's rule.

Man is currently ruling this earthly kingdom. God gave him free choice, and dominion over all the animals, etc. The Messiah is the one that conquered death for all mankind. At Messiah's return is when the resurrection occurs. That is when mankind will relinquish his rule over this earthly kingdom. Man will no longer be able to do as he pleases. There will be a judgement and each man will go to his destination. (heaven or hell)

The translators didn't create the Bible. The original authors were inspired by God. The translators and scholars don't always get things right.

And Koine Greek was not the original language of the NT, it was Aramaic. The Greek was a translation.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

They are? I don't see that in the scriptures. 1 Corinthians 15:28 says (I use various translations to get the point across...) that the Son will be in subjection to the One that gave him, the Son, authority.

New International Version
When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.
New Living Translation
Then, when all things are under his authority, the Son will put himself under God’s authority, so that God, who gave his Son authority over all things, will be utterly supreme over everything everywhere.

When it says the son in those verses it is referring to mankind and his descendants. The Messiah is going to rule forever. Your view in those verses conflicts with all the verses that say the Messiah will rule forever and that there will be no end to his kingdom.