Revelation Chapter 1 says Jesus is NOT GOD.

Revelation chapter 1

does NOT say that Jesus is their "God".

The unknown author of this book
starts off by clarifying that Jesus is not God.

He says it happened this way:

The entity called "God"
told the separate entity called "Jesus" something.

It's something that "God" already knew
but that Jesus did not already know.

God was going to tell everyone something he had not told anyone before. 

So he told Jesus.

He told Jesus to tell their followers about it.

Jesus told an angel.

An angel told John.

John told others.

Eventually, someone who heard oral rumors about this wrote down their own personal understanding of what they heard about it.

It's hearsay; spread from unverifiable sources. 
That's what "Bibles" are.
It's all just rumors handed down by people we know nothing about.

But we can set that matter aside.

Today, we're just looking at what this particular block of texts says about Jesus' relationship to "God". 

Read it. 

1. Entity "God"
told
2. Entity "Son" a message.
And then said to tell others.

3. Entity "Son" clearly did not already know the information until he was told the information.

It's impossible to inform someone of something they already know.

You could mistakenly think you are informing someone of something.
Perhaps you'll later discover they already knew the thing.

But respectable "gods" don't makes such mistakes.
Do they?

Nor would it be honest to speak as-if a listener did not already know something if they already knew it.

According to the writer, Jesus did NOT already know that message.

He had to be told that message ...
 by "God".

There is also a clear difference (non-equality) of authority in play between the "God" who orders Jesus to do things.

In fact, when a spirit-being is given the job to relay messages from a "God", 
that is literally the definition of "angel".

And frankly, it's ridiculous to suppose that a "God" has multiple distinct personalities (each with their own separate will);
worse yet that his DOM personality likes to boss around his SUB personality. 

Religious fundamentalists express a persistent need to turn everything into dominance hierarchies. 

I won't deny that this is happening in the texts.
Of course it is.
But Trinitarians are creating a very strange twist, to envision a deity whose own mind is so unevenly fractured. 

I'm honestly surprised fundamentalists can eat an Oreo cookie without deciding first that they are "dominating" that cookie. 



But there is it.
All throughout the texts.
Somebody is always "joyously" authority-humping somebody else. 


In fact, this was EXACTLY the "moral lesson" intended by Biblical laws that forbid men from being MOUNTED by other men.

There actually weren't any biblical laws against homosexuality.
Those were mistranslations. 
It was only about making sure a man is always sexually on top and doing the penetrating; 
as a way to honor their religious ideas about the natural order. 

They were wrong; about all of it.
But because they were wrong, they built ideas about "God" as expressions of their own wrong perceptions. 

Later Christians just keep adding more layers of wrongness. 




Likewise, the NT writers attempted to create a correlation between their Jesus and the "Sophia" (wisdom; personified as a woman) in the Hebrew texts. 

The logos was feminine. 
But the Father was never feminine.

The Father was more "man" (in his essence; or "nature") than Jesus.
 So the Father dominated Jesus, as part of the natural and enteral order. 

They were not envisioned as equals.

Jesus was a slave to the Father.
He was not born free. 
He will never be set free.
He will always have one master.
Although, he would later (in those stories) be put in charge of lesser slaves.

That way of looking at the world
made it both fine and necessary (in their religion) for the father-deity to dominate his son. 

It's an unhealthy mental quirk; indictive of unhealthy minds. 

Those people had no idea of what a healthy and sustainable relationship looks like. 

They had no idea what a healthy mind is like.

But let's AT LEAST not portray the Creator Of The Universe as having a DOM personality that regularly enjoys subjugating a fractured part of his own psyche.
 
It makes more sense to simply read the texts for what they actually say.

There, where we fine deity in an equal partnership with his son. 

Likewise, we find a son who just accepts that as the way things are and 'should be'.

In real life, that would seriously stunt a son's maturity. 

It would be a quietly tragic and ironically celebrated dysfunction. 

However, ...

No matter what we might think or feel about such a deity's relationship to either his SON or his SELF, ...
 
We should at least realize it's all a bad example to set for impressionable humans.
Why?
Because it's a bad way for US to relate to others and/or to ourselves.

Whoever wrote that story had a very 
unfortunate mind.  

But it's not as troubling as a deity with multiple personalities. 

Fortunately, that even-worse idea is not actually present in the texts. 

Throughout the Christian texts, 
"God" is separate from
and maintains authority over
his "Son". 

Likewise, that same difference (non-equality) between Jesus and the angel is also seen in Jesus telling the angel what to do. 

If Jesus were that "God", then the opening to that chapter would have read as
"God told an angel a message to relay to John".
But that's not what it says.
Instead,
it identifies the entity of their "God"
and then distinguishes that entity from "Jesus".

After that:

4. Entity "Son" tells that message to an angel. 

5. Entity "angel" then tells Entity "John".

6. Entity "John" then tells others.
-------
That message

[according to the unknown author of this book
who claims to know what John wrote about it]:

"4 From John to the seven churches in Asia.

I pray that you
will be blessed
with kindness and peace
from God, who is and was
and is coming."
----

Here, we see that the message starts with telling the seven churches that "God"
is there with them,
was previously there with them,
and
will be there with them in the future.

This says nothing about any deity's timelessness.

It only addresses time from the linear human perspective.

Their deity "was", "is" and "will be" there with them.

Note the word "coming" defines the meaning of the three temporal statements.

Without that word, it would be an incomplete statement.

"Is what?"
"Was what?"
"Will be what in the future?"

"Coming" tells the reader that these are statements of where (or 'with whom') that God can be seen; sometime in the past,
and
in their present time,
and
in their future.

This is basic 4th grade English.

-------

Next,

"5 May kindness and peace
be yours
from Jesus Christ,
the faithful witness."

Note:
Jesus is NOT the originator of that message.

Rather, he is identified as a separate entity who is "faithful" TO that "God"
as a "witness" FOR that deity.

If Jesus WAS/IS that "God", then these would be ridiculous statements.
It would be a case of that deity "authoring confusion".
And then his FANS gaslighting us about it.

Next:

"Jesus was the first
to conquer death,"

Spoiler alerts:
For any Super-Being who is immutably eternal (even into the past; aka: always),
that means:
They can't die.

Do you want a sure-fire way to test, to see if someone who claims to be a GOD, to see if they really are one?
Try to kill them.

If you can kill them then they weren't immortal.
 
When the writer says Jesus DIED, that's the same as saying "wasn't immortal".
------------
Next:

"6 He lets us rule as kings
and serve God his Father
as priests."

Here, we are told again that humans can serve the "God" and "Father" of Jesus.
God's don't have any g/God(s) over them.
But Jesus does. Because Jesus isn't a g/God.

-----------
Next:

"7 Look! He is coming
with the clouds.
Everyone will see him,
even the ones who stuck
a sword through him."

Why does it say this? 
Because their religion promised/required that the end of our world would happen in their lifetime.
That way, even the soldier who ran a sword into him would be around to see Jesus return.

#ProphecyFailed.
--------
Lastly,

"8 The Lord God says, “I am Alpha and Omega,[c] the one who is and was and is coming. I am God All-Powerful!”

Here, this is what GOD said TO Jesus
who then relayed that message FROM GOD
ABOUT GOD
TO an angel,
who then told it to John,
who then told it to the seven congregations.

Later, eventually some random nobody heard about it and wrote it down.

It's really not that hard to follow.

The writer keeps reminding us that Jesus is NOT God.
The writer never once contradicts himself by speaking as if Jesus was God.

Centuries later, various versions of the "Jesus is God" slogan evolved.

Eventually, it became a matter of necessary dogma for all the mainstream cults who had their brains tampered with by preachers who INSISTED that the "Jesus is God" dogma is encoded in many statements (which do not actually say any such thing).

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%201&version=CEV