CHAPTER 6. JESUS IS REPEATEDLY CALLED GOD IN THE SCRIPTURES.

1. Jesus is called God the Word in John.1v1.

"Logos" is derived from "lego," to speak intelligently. The revelation of Jesus as "ho Logos," the Word, is intended to convey that Jesus is the eternal and full expression of the Father's divine essence and intelligence, and the revealer of those divine attributes to men and angels. The pre-incarnate God the Word fully revealed the being and essence of the Godhead in Heaven, and, oh glorious truth, fully revealed the divine nature and being of God in his incarnation and true humanity, "He who has seen me has seen the Father." John.14v9. Even before his incarnation Jesus was the divine revealer of God's wisdom and power, "the Word of Yahweh" to men. Gen.20v3. Is.22v4.

The term "Logos" is only used to speak of Jesus in Jn.1v1,14. Rev.19v13. and in 1Jn.1v1. where He is referred to as "the Word of life." In Heb.4v12. there is a possible reference to Jesus as "the Word of God." Even some heathen philosophers used "logos" to describe the controlling and generative principle behind the universe, but they fell far short of the divine revelation that was given to John of the eternal personal pre-existence and eternal deity of Jesus as God the Word. Three times in Jn.1v1., John uses "en," the imperfect of "eimi," "to be," to show the continuous eternal existence of God and the Logos. Jesus emphasised His timeless eternal existence, when He said, "Before Abraham was, 'genesthai,' I am," "eimi," i.e. timeless existence. Jn.8v58. In Jn.1v14., "egeneto," "became," is used for the incarnation of the Logos. Jn.17v5. Paul also teaches the eternal pre-existent deity of Jesus. 2Cor.8v9. Phil.2v5-11. Col.1v15-17. Heb.1v2-12.

Christ was not like John the Baptist, a temporary voice which cried aloud in the wilderness, Christ was the Logos, God the Word, who eternally existed with God the Father. Logos denotes both reason and speech, as reason, it speaks of the mind and purposes of God; and as speech, it speaks of the revelation of God to man. By describing Christ as the Logos, John was saying in another way, what Paul writes in Col.2v9., "In Him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily;" i.e. Christ has all the fullness, ability and knowledge of absolute deity. John, under the Holy Spirit's guidance, took the word Logos, and gave it a fullness of meaning far beyond that which the Alexandrian Jews had given to it. The Alexandrian Jews had used Logos to speak of the revelation that the unseen God had given of Himself in the creation and government of the world. John goes further and states that the full revelation and Word of God to man is in God the Logos, the Lord Jesus Christ, who became incarnate for our salvation. Only God can fully reveal God, and only God the Son can reveal the Father, and the Father the Son. Mt.11v25-27. Lk.10v21-23. John could not have given a more positive declaration of the absolute deity of Christ than when he called Him "The Word," and said, "And God was the Word."

The apostle John introduces Jesus by saying, "In the beginning was the Word;" he does not say, "In the beginning God created the Word." John specifically states that the Word, Jesus, is the great Creator, and is not a created being. The statement explicitly declares that God the Father and God the Word existed eternally together. It is necessary to state this because some false prophets have tried to say that Christ was a created being, and have tried to justify their false doctrine by incorrectly translating, "And God was the Word," "kai Theos en ho Logos," as, "The Word was a god." However, the fact that the definite article, "the," is not before "God," in the Greek, does not warrant the placing of the indefinite article "a," before "God."

In Greek the definite article was not always put before a word even though it would be definitely needed to give the correct sense in English. In the New Testament the definite article "the" is not always put in even when it is definitely implied; for example in Heb.10v31. "the living God," has no definite article, but no one would translate it, "a living God." See also 1Tim.3v15. The Greek language has only a definite article.

Dr. Robertson's Greek Grammar states on page 767; "as already explained the article is not essential to speech;" i.e., it could be used or omitted without making any real difference. Dr. Robertson also states in his Greek Lexicon, page 547, "The usage of language varies much in respect to their articles; and in Greek especially, the usage seems in many cases never to have become fixed, to be have been left to the taste and judgement of the writer or speaker, as is also in some measure the case with our English." End of quote.

Arndt and Gingrich in their Greek Lexicon state, "It is difficult to set hard and fast rules for the employment of the article, since the writer's feeling for style had special freedom of play in this area." End of quote.

Greek scholars support the translation, "And God was the Word," in John.1v1.

W. E. Vine makes the following note on page 160 of his "Expository Dictionary of New Testament words".

"Theos is used 1. with the definite article, 2. without (as an anarthrous noun).---- it is usual to employ the article with a proper name, when mentioned a second time. There are, of course, exceptions to this, as when the absence of the article serves to lay stress upon, or give precision to, the character or nature of what is expressed in the noun. A notable instance of this is in Jn.1v1. 'and the Word was God;' here a double stress is upon 'Theos,' by the absence of the article and by the emphatic position. To translate it literally, 'a god was the Word," is entirely misleading. Moreover, that 'the Word' is the subject of the sentence, exemplifies the rule that the subject is to be determined by its having the article when the predicate is anarthrous (i.e. without the article)."

A.T. Robertson, the scholarly Greek grammarian, makes the following helpful note on "kai Theos en ho Logos," "and the Word was God," in his "Word Pictures in the Greek New Testament." He writes:

"By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying 'ho theos en ho logos.' That would mean that all of God was expressed in 'ho logos' and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (ho Logos) and the predicate without it (theos) just as in John.4v24. 'pneuma ho theos' can only mean 'God is spirit,' not 'spirit is God.' So in 1John.4v16. 'ho theos agape estin' can only mean 'God is love,' not 'love is God' as the so called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, Grammar, pp.767f. So in John.1v14 'ho logos sarx egeneto,' the Word became flesh,' not 'the flesh became Word." Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God." End of quote.

Williams states, that the Greek construction places an emphasis upon 'Theos,' and so emphasises the deity of Christ.

C. F. D. Moule states of Jn.1v1., "and God was the Word," "It would be pure Sabellianism to say 'the Word was ho Theos' (that is to put in the definite article 'the,' and say 'the God') No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form of expression, which simply affirms the true deity of the Word." End of Quote.

Without any doubt "kai Theos en ho Logos," should be translated, "and God was the Word," and the Greek construction emphasises the true deity of Christ. How foolish to say that Christ was "a god," meaning that He is a little god, this is akin to heathen thought. In Is.9v6. we read that Christ is "the Mighty God," "El Gibbor;" this Hebrew title is an exclusive title of Yahweh God, and it is applied to Yahweh in Is.10v21. and Jer.32v18. Only blind and wilful unbelief can deny that Jn.1v1. is teaching the absolute deity of Christ.

2. Christ is called "My Lord and My God" by Thomas in John.20v28.

Thomas addresses Christ as, "Ho kurios mou kai ho theos mou," which means literally, "The Lord of me and the God of me." The definite article ("the") is used before both "kurios" and "theos." Thomas goes to the limit of worship and adoration by calling the Lord Jesus, "My the Lord and my the God." This would have been the height of blasphemy if Christ had been a mere created being.

We read that Peter, Paul and Barnabus, and the angel, all refused to receive worship, and protested most strongly when it was given to them. Yet Christ does not rebuke Thomas for his affirmation of Christ's deity, on the contrary, Christ gently chides Thomas for taking so long to believe in Him as Lord and God. Thomas recognised that the Lord Jesus was God manifested in the flesh, and in so doing he exhorts us to do the same. When Thomas said to Jesus, "my Lord and my God," "my God," is "ho theos mou," which are exactly the same words that Christ used when he said "my God, my God" when he spoke to His Father from the cross. Mk.15v34. In His humanity, and work of mediation, the Father was the God who Christ worshipped and trusted in; yet in His deity Christ was also the God of Thomas and shares with the Father the worship and praise of the creation.

3. We read in Heb.1v8 that Christ is the God whose throne endures for ever.

We read in Heb.1v8. that Christ is "ho theos;" the quotation is taken almost verbatim from the Septuagint of Ps.45v6,7.. The Septuagint often uses "ho theos" as a vocative, a direct address to God. Ps.3v7. 4v1. 5v10. 7v1. (The vocative case is the case of direct address: "He said unto him, Man, thy sins are forgiven thee." Lk.5v20) The Authorised Version, the Revised Version, and the Revised Standard Version, quite rightly support the vocative and translate, "ho thronos sou, ho theos," as "Thy Throne O God." Bengel goes as far as to say, "They clearly do violence to the text who hold the opinion that it is the nominative case in this passage." This certainly seems true, for to translate "O God" in the nominative case as the subject would read, "God is thy throne," and in the predicate as "Thy Throne is God," both of these translations are absurd and don't make sense, and they have no parallel elsewhere. Those who translate this way are obviously just wilfully determined to avoid recognising the absolute deity of Christ. The whole of Heb.1. is teaching that Christ is "theos," and "ho theos," and possesses absolute deity.

We read in Heb.1v3. that Christ is "the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person;" the word that is used for "express image" is "charakter," it means an exact image and resemblance. The "charakter" was the engraved mark, die or stamp that was used to establish a persons identity. Christ is the exact representation of the invisible God, and He reveals His absolute deity and character. In Heb.1v10-14., Paul affirms that Christ is the eternally unchanging Creator who rules and directs the angels and His creation. The whole passage proves the deity of Christ, and like Thomas the unbiased and humble heart will confess that Christ is "My Lord and my God.

4. In Acts20v28. Paul states that God shed His blood for the Church.

In Acts.20v28., some manuscripts have "Lord" for "God" in the Greek, others have both together, i.e. "Lord and God," which Hodges and Farstad put as the majority text. The evidence for both "Lord" and "God" is good, however, Paul never uses the phrase "the Church of the Lord" any where else in his writings, whereas he often uses the phrase "The Church of God".1Cor.1v2. 10v32. 11v16,22. 15v9. 2Cor.1v1. Gal.1v13. 1Thes.2v14 2Thes.1v4. 1Tim.3v5,15. Paul uses the phrase "the Churches of Christ" in Rom.16v16. and Christ Himself said that the Church was His Church in Mt.16v18. The Scriptures teach that the Church is called "the Church of Christ, and the Church of God," and like Thomas true Christians will recognise that Christ is Lord and God of the Church which He purchased with His own precious blood.

5. In Rom.9v5. Paul declares that Christ is "God over all, blessed for ever."

Some have tried to say that these words are a doxology to the Father, however, in all other Scriptural doxologies the word "blessed" precedes the name of God, e.g. "Blessed be God." Ps.68v35. 72v18. It would be quite strange and quite out of place to use a doxology in such a context, for Paul was discussing Israel's unbelief, a subject that gave him "great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart." Paul is stating that Christ was an Israelite "concerning the flesh," but that He was "God over all, blessed for ever," in His deity. Paul was certainly not just giving a doxology to the Father as an afterthought, he was stressing that Jesus the Messiah was the God who was supreme over all, and that He would be worshipped and blessed for ever with the Father.2Cor.11v31. Eph.4v6. John.5v23.

6. In Phil.2v5,6., Christ is said to have subsisted as God.

W. E. Vine in his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words," writes on Phil.2v6., under "Being," "huparcho: "(c) the present participle of 'huparcho,' to exist, which always involves a pre-existent state, prior to the fact referred to, and a continuance of the state after the fact. Thus in Phil.2v6. the phrase 'who being (huparchon) in the form of God," implies His pre-existent Deity, previous to His Birth, and His continued Deity afterwards." End of quote.

Other commentators and translators make the same point. Wordsworth translates, "subsisting or pre-existing in the form of God." Phillips translates, "for He, who has always been God by nature." Rotheram states, "Who in the form of God subsisting." The American Standard Version reads, "who existing in the form of God." Jesus existed as God before His emptying at the incarnation, and after it He was still God manifested in flesh, even though sorely tried by the limitations of His humanity.

The Greek word "morphe" translated "form," gives additional proof of Christ's deity, for "morphe" speaks of the essential form and inner nature, not the mere outward form. Paul is stating that Christ was essentially by nature of God, having the essential form and incommunicable nature of God, as Warfield states, "possessing the fullness of the attributes that make God, God.".

Lightfoot writes, "though 'morphe' is not the same as 'phusis' (i.e. nature) or 'ousia' (i.e. substance), yet the possession of the 'morphe' involves participation in the 'ousia' also; for 'morphe' implies not the external accidents but the essential attributes."

Gifford writes about "morphe" on pages 16,19, and 39, of his book, "The Incarnation," "Morphe is therefore properly the nature or essence, not in the abstract, but as actually subsisting in the individual, and retained as long as the individual itself exists....Thus the passage before us 'morphe theou' is the Divine nature actually and inseparably subsisting in the person of Christ....or the interpretation of 'the form of God' it is sufficient to say that 1. it includes the whole nature and essence of Deity, and is inseparable from them, since they could have no actual existence without it; and 2. that it does not include in itself anything 'accidental' or separable, such as particular modes of manifestation, or conditions of glory and majesty, which may at one time be attached to the 'form' at another separated from it....The true meaning of 'morphe' in the expression 'form of God' is confirmed by its recurrence in the corresponding phrase, 'form of servant, It is universally admitted that the phrases are directly antithetical, and that 'form' must therefore have the same sense in both."

Christ is not a shadowy image, vague resemblance, or outline sketch ("skia," Heb.10v1.). He is the exact image ("eikon," Col.1v15), and exact resemblance ("charakter," Heb.1v3.); and in Phil.2v6. Paul emphasises the fact that in His pre-incarnate state Jesus was existing in the essential form of God in the fullest possible sense. At His incarnation the Lord had to of necessity empty Himself of His omniscience, omnipresence, omnipotence, transcendence and immutability; but He could not and did not empty Himself His Divine being and essential nature (i.e. ousia); for even in His incarnate state the soul of Jesus was the image of the invisible God. Col.1v15. Heb.1v3. Jn.14v9. Jesus came and lived the same beautiful and sinless life in this wicked world that He had lived in Heaven. Christ's existence in the form of God before His incarnation was as real as His existence in the form of a servant in human form after His incarnation.

In Phil.2v6. Paul states Jesus "counted it no act of robbery to be equal to God." Phillips translates this verse, "For He, who has always been God by nature did not cling to His prerogatives as God's equal." Paul definitely states that Jesus was God and not a creature, and goes on to say that Christ "counted it no act of robbery, "harpagmos," to be equal with God," that is, it was His own unquestionable right.. As Jesus already existed as God, and enjoyed the essential attributes and powers of deity, He did not have to strive for equality with the Father, for it was already His. Jesus, chose to lay on one side the throne of glory and power to wrap himself in the clay of our humanity for our sakes. However, as John states in Jn.5v18., even in His humanity the incarnate God the Word was equal in deity to the Father. Christ was subordinate to the Father in His mission, but equal to Him in His deity.

Gifford writes about "harpagmos" in Phil.2v6,, on pages 28 and 36 of his book "The Incarnation," "In order to express the meaning of the clause quite clearly, a slight alteration is required in the Revised Version, 'counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God.' The form 'to be' is ambiguous and easily lends itself to the erroneous notion that to be on equality with God was something to be acquired in the future. The rendering 'counted it not a prize that He was on an equality with God,' is quite as accurate and more free from ambiguity....Assuming, as we now may, that the equality was something that Christ possessed prior to His Incarnation, and then for a time resigned, we have...to choose between two meanings of the word 'harpagmos;' 1. with the active sense 'robbery' or 'usurpation' we get the following meaning: 'Who because He was subsisting in the essential form of God, did not regard it as any usurpation that He was on an equality of glory and majesty with God, but yet emptied Himself of that coequal glory... 2. The passive sense gives a different meaning to the passage: 'Who though He was subsisting in the essential form of God, yet did not regard His being on an equality of glory and majesty with God as a prize and a treasure to be held fast, but emptied Himself thereof.'" End of quote.

Gifford after considering the arguments for and against these two interpretations, believes the second conveys the true meaning of the passage, "to set forth Christ as the supreme example of humility and self-renunciation;" and as this is the theme of the whole passage, we would heartily agree with Gifford.

Jamieson Fausset and Brown's commentary states on Phil.2v6.. "The image of the invisible God at a time before 'every creature' 2Cor.4v4. esteemed (the same Greek verb as in v3.) His being on an equality with God no (act of) robbery or self-arrogation; claiming to one's self what does not belong to Him. Ellicott, Wahl. etc. have translated, 'A thing to be grasped at, which would require the Greek to be 'harpagma' whereas 'harpagmos' means the act of seizing. So 'harpagmos' means in the only passage where else it occurs, (Plutarch 'de educatione peurorum' 120.) The same insuperable objection lies against Alford's translation, 'He regarded not as self-enrichment (i.e., an opportunity for self-exaltation) His equality with God.'"

In Phil.2v1-11., Paul gives states that Jesus is the perfect example of self-sacrifice and self-abasement, to bring home his exhortation to humility of mind. Paul shows that the self-sacrifice of Christ was voluntary and sprang from the constraint of pure love, and not from force, or a sense of duty. Christ, who was existing as God, emptied Himself and took upon Himself the form of a slave and became obedient to death out of pure love for others. Jesus was willing to abdicate the position of equality with the Father, which was His by right, for our salvation. Paul had already stated that Christ had pre-existed as God, and possessed the essential form, nature and essence of God, now he goes on to state that God the Word's equality with the Father was not a spoil which Christ had usurped wrongfully, Christ subsisted from eternity in equality with the Father, Christ did not count it an unjust assumption to be equal with the Father.

In Phil.2v9-11., and Rom.14v10-12., Paul quotes Is.45v21-23., and applies Scripture that applies to Yahweh and to Yahweh alone to Jesus, and says that Jesus is the Yahweh before whom every knee shall bow. Paul tells us that the name of Jesus is above every name, and that every knee is going to bow to Him, and every tongue confess that He is Yahweh to the glory of God the Father. The Christ child was given the name Jesus, or "Yeshua," i.e. "Yahweh the Saviour." As Jer.23v6. states, "this is the name by which He shall be called, 'The Lord (Yahweh) our righteousness." cf. Rev.19v12,13,16. Joel.2v32. Rom.10v9,10,11. Acts.4v12. 5v41. with Is.23v16. 49v23.

N.B. The "emptying" of God the Word at the incarnation.

In His humanity Christ was still God, but God "emptied," the Word became flesh and fully experienced the limitations and temptations of humanity, and the awful death upon the cross for our salvation. Jesus "emptied Himself," but He was still Christ the Lord, God manifest in the flesh. However, the "emptying" of Jesus was very real, and the constraint of a human body was very trying, He said in Lk.12v50., "But I have a baptism to be baptised with; and how am I straitened ("sunecho," 4912) till it be accomplished!" Liberal theologians, (if they deserve the name theologian), have said that Paul's phrase, "emptied Himself," "heauton ekenose," meant that "Jesus was a child of His times," and so made mistakes, and was in error in some of His ideas and teaching. We totally reject this blasphemous heretical nonsense. Jesus only spoke and did what the Father told Him. Jn.5v18,19,30. These heretics actually charge the Almighty with folly and error.

The Authorised Version's, "But made Himself of no reputation," in Phil.2v7., gives a very poor idea of the extent of our Lord's incredible sacrificial self emptying. Other translations give a better translation, and shed more light on this remarkable Scripture. The American Standard Version reads, "But emptied Himself." John Wesley, "Yet emptied Himself." Goodspeed writes, "but laid it aside." Conybear reads, "but stripped Himself." This Scripture shows us the reason why Christ could say during His earthly ministry, "My Father is greater than I," Jn.14v23., and why Jesus said that the Father was His God as well as ours. Jn.20v17. Jesus had to live, work and minister in absolute dependence on the Father. Jn.6v57,58. 5v19-30. Jesus stripped Himself of His equal power and glory for the work of redemption, and in Jn.17v5., He prayed for the former glory that He had laid aside to be restored to Him; this was granted after the first ascension of Jn.20v17., for Christ had all power in heaven and earth given to Him. Mt.28v18. God does not give His glory to another, only God the Word, who had laid aside that glory for our redemption, could have it restored to Him. Is.42v8.

Paul's lesson on the humility of Christ in Phil.2v5-11., also gives us some of the most important doctrine on the deity of Christ in the Scriptures. Paul emphasises the supreme practical humility and sacrificial love of Christ, and in doing so gives us a glorious doctrinal statement that is a real safeguard against heresy. Paul teaches the plurality of persons in the Godhead, and affirms the true deity and humility of Christ, and His pre-existence and eternal existence as God.

Few Scriptures are so illuminating, practical and inspiring as Phil.2v5-11., the following paraphrase may help to reveal Paul's thoughts in it. "Let the same disposition, attitude, purpose and mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus, who existed in the essential form of God, having always been God by nature. He did not deem His own equality with God a prize to be clung to, but emptied Himself and became like other men, taking upon Him the form of a slave, and became obedient unto death upon the cross for our salvation. Because of this astounding sacrificial love God has highly exalted Him and given Him a Name which is above every name, and that at His Name every knee is going to bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Yahweh to the glory of the Father." Let us then, with Paul and every true believer, confess Christ as Lord, and praise honour and adore both the Father and Son for our great salvation.

7. Paul writes in Titus.2v13. that Jesus is "our great God and Saviour".

John Wesley translates this verse, "looking for our blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God, even our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave Himself for us," and other translators give the verse this same sense.

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown make the following very helpful note. "Translate, as the one article to both nouns requires, 'The righteousness of Him who is (at once) our God and (our) Saviour.' Peter, confirming Paul's testimony to the same Churches, adopts Paul's inspired phraseology." It also states. "There is but one Greek article to 'God' and 'Saviour' which shows that both are predicted of one and the same Being. 'Of Him who is at once the great God and our Saviour. Also, (2) 'appearing' ('epiphaneia') is never by Paul predicated of God the Father (John.1v18. 1Tim.6v16.), or even of 'His glory' (as Alford explains it): is invariably applied to Christ's coming, to which (at His first advent, cf.2Tim.1v10.) the kindred verb 'appeared' ('epephanee'), v11, refers (1Tim.6v14. 2Tim.4v1,8. also (3) in the context (v14) there is no reference to the Father in the exigencies of the context. Also (4) the expression 'great God', as applied to Christ is in accordance with the context, which refers to the glory of His appearing; just as 'the true God' is predicated of Christ in 1John.5v20.. The phrase occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, but often in the Old Testament Deut.7v21. 10v17., predicated of Yahweh who, as their manifested Lord, led the Israelites through the wilderness, doubtless the second person in the Trinity. Believers now look for the manifestation of His glory, inasmuch as they shall share in it. Even the Socinian explanation, making 'the great God' to be the Father, 'our Saviour', the Son, places God and Christ on an equal relation to 'the glory' of the future appearing: a fact incompatible with the notion that Christ is not Divine, indeed it would be blasphemy so to couple any mere created being with God." End of quote.

Bishop Wordsworth. Says the words, 'tou Theou hemen kai Soteros Iesou Christou:' "Are best rendered, 'of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ.' That they may be thus rendered, cannot be doubted. And they are rendered thus by Beza, Hemming, Gerhard, Dietlein, and others here; and by the Greek and Latin Fathers in the similar place of it. Paul, viz. Titus.2v13., 'tou megalou Theou kai Soteros hemon Iesou Christou'----This declaration of the Godhead of Christ was very suitable to the commencement of this Epistle, in which the Author is speaking of the gracious dispensation by which we have become 'partakers of the divine nature,' v4; a participation effected by the Incarnation of the Eternal Word (John.1v14.) God manifested in the flesh (1Tim.3v16), "God with us " (Matt.1v23)." End of quote.

In 2Pet.2v1., Peter warns that false teachers would bring in "damnable heresies," literally, "heresies of destruction," and that they would even deny the Lord who bought them. Peter states in 2Pet.1v1., that Jesus is our "great God and Saviour;" and in 2Pet.3v18. Peter again affirms that Jesus is our Lord and Saviour who is to be glorified and worshipped for ever. Titus.1v4.

And so we could go on; Christ is "the true God," 1John.5v20., the Almighty, Rev.1v8., and in Christ dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. Col.2v9. When one considers all the Scriptures concerning the deity of Christ, one can only repeat the worship and praise that came to the lips of Thomas, we cry with all of our hearts "my Lord and my God," Christ is Lord and God, Yahweh God manifested in the flesh for our salvation. He is "the Lord of glory" and His throne will be forever.

CLICK HERE FOR PREVIOUS PAGE....        CLICK HERE FOR NEXT PAGE....