Christianity, Cults and Culture

COGR – God and His Throne or God Is His Throne.

February 2, 2024

Good day! I am writing a series of short reviews of abbreviated COGR video clips. I am looking for input and comments. If it makes it easier, I will gladly supply a Word document so comments can be put in the document, and we can communicate directly. My email address is lattema@icloud.com. I hope you find these reviews helpful.

Transcript:

“So God is sitting on the throne. Do not think of God himself separate from his throne. Think of this as a vision of God himself. And what we’re going to see is one vision of everything that is locked away in the heart of God. So the throne is not something just that he sits on; it’s given that way as a symbolic representation to us, and he certainly is seated there. But the throne is something that proceeds out of God as a part of God so that we know who God is and how he reigns.” – Stephen Hargrave

Commentary:

To some, this issue may seem like a small matter, but it is significant. Stephen Hargrave is redefining the nature of God. This error is compounded twice during the series: first, when the elders are said to be part of the throne, and second, later, when the church becomes the throne. Both errors are important and will be discussed later. Here, we want only to see whether the throne really proceeds from God.

In the West, as theists, we typically understand that God is outside his creation. He is the creator of the physical universe we experience, and he can act on and within it, but the universe is not part of God. In the East, Pantheists understand that everything is God. God, an impersonal God, emanates all that is, and ultimately everything returns to God.

When we look at the Scriptures, we find that the Scriptures teach that God is a creator who is outside of creation. Therefore, Theism, following Scripture, asserts that God is separate from his creation. He does not exude thrones or anything else.

Stephen Hargrave posits that God, depicted on the throne in Revelation, should be perceived not separately from His throne but as a comprehensive vision encapsulating all within God’s essence. His argument suggests the throne is an integral part of God, offering symbolic insight into His identity and reign. However, examining the text of Revelation 4:2, no explicit indication supports Stephen’s notion that the throne proceeds from God. Contrary to his claim, the text doesn’t substantiate this argument. Furthermore, biblical verses like Colossians 1:16-17 and Psalm 104:30 underscore God’s creation and sustenance without conflating it with God Himself, maintaining a clear distinction between Creator and creation. Stephen’s assertions lean towards Pantheism or Panentheism, philosophies equating everything with God, suggesting an inseparable unity, differing significantly from traditional theism’s understanding of a separate God and His created universe.

Text:

2

εὐθέως

ἐγενόμην

ἐν

πνεύματι

,

καὶ

ἰδοὺ

θρόνος

ἔκειτο

ἐν

τῷ

Immediately

I became

in

spirit

and

look

throne

was set

in

the

οὐρανῷ

,

καὶ

ἐπὶ

τὸν

θρόνον

καθήμενος

heaven

and

on

the

throne

one sitting

Barbara Aland et al., The Greek New Testament, 4th ed. (Federal Republic of Germany: United Bible Societies, 1993), Re 4:2.

It is evident that the text does not support Stephen’s argument, which confuses the nature of God. Nor is there any Scripture where God’s creation is said to flow from him or of anything that is inseparable from Him. Some verses that highlight God’s relationship with creation include Colossians 1:16-17 (NIV): “For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him, all things hold together.” Psalm 104:30 (NIV): “When you send your Spirit, they are created, and you renew the face of the ground.” The above verses emphasize God’s involvement in creation and His sustaining power while maintaining the distinction between the Creator (God) and His creation. They describe God’s intimate relationship with His creation but do not equate creation with God. The biblical narrative consistently presents God as separate from creation, existing before it, and as the sustainer of all things rather than being synonymous with creation. Stephen’s claims support Pantheism, a more Eastern understanding of God, which explains that everything emanates from God and is God. Creation is inseparable from God. So, Stephen’s claims could be interpreted as being pantheistic or possibly panentheistic. That is not what is expected from a ministry that claims to be biblical.