And I heard every creature which is in heaven, and upon the earth, and under the earth, and on the sea, and everything in them, saying: “To the One sitting on the throne, and to the Lamb, blessing and honor and glory and might to the ages of the ages.”
Revelation 5:13
This argument I first heard from James White. He uses it in a few debates, most notably in his debate with Anthony Buzzard and Joseph Good, but he also uses it in his book, “the Forgotten Trinity.” His argument essentially goes:
“Every created thing worships the one who sits on the throne and the lamb excluding the Lamb from the realm of created things.”
link to debate video timestamp, 16:27
The argument being that since the text says “every created thing” worships the Lamb, the Lamb itself cannot be created. This seems quite clearly to be a self assuming argument. It is very common in the OT for Moses to command “all of Israel” to do X, which he himself does not do. Does it follow that Moses is not part of the nation of Israel? No. It’s a statement that doesn’t need to be specified to anyone with the ability to read.
Then David said to all the assembly, “Bless the LORD your God.” And all the assembly blessed the LORD, the God of their fathers, and bowed their heads and paid homage to the LORD and to the king.
1 Chronicles 29:20
When David commanded the assembly of Israel to bow, it is clear that he himself didn’t bow to the king, because he is the king. From James’ argument, we must conclude that David himself is not part of the assembly of Israel. This is clearly absurd, and it borderlines on an argument from absence. Since the text did not say Jesus is a created thing, we must assume he’s not. This is a fallacious argument.
Further, we have a similar example in 1 Corinthians 15:24-28.
Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.
1 Corinthians 15:24-28
Paul, in this case, does specify that when we say “all things,” something is excluded. He even says “it is obvious” or in the ESV translation above, “plain.” Common sense should tell you that there’s an exclusion. We should not be so spiritually immature that we can’t understand the obvious exclusions unless they are pointed out to us.
However, the final point I wish to make is the strongest. Even in a Trinitarian reading, the subject of this verse necessarily is a created thing. As pointed out in my last post (see point 6) the subject of Revelation 5 is a created thing, a man, a lamb. In verse 5 we have the one being praised in verse 13 described as “the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David.” Is the child born of David and Judah an “uncreated thing?” No. It’s a created man with an origin from man (see Matthew 1:1, 18, and notice the Greek word used “genesis” which literally means “origin/origination”). Verse 6 describes this one as “a lamb having been slain.” Was it an “uncreated thing” that was slain? Was it an “uncreated human body” that was hanging dead on a cross? Verse 9, “by your blood you ransomed people for God.” Does an uncreated thing have blood? Verse 12, just before our subject verse, “worthy is the Lamb who was slain.” The subject of the praise received by “every created thing” is the Lamb that was slain. Someone who was dead as a sacrifice. Could this possibly be an “uncreated thing?” Even the most competent trinitarian knows that the body of Jesus was created, which was slain on a cross. Even the most ignorant Trinitarian knows that that which was born of the line of Judah and David was a child born, a created child.
Do we really need verse 13 to clarify that when all creation worships the Lamb, that it is obvious the Lamb is excluded because he is not worshipping himself? Or should common sense be enough? As noted in the previous post as well (see point 5) the worship song changes between the worship song given to the Father, from the song given to the son, to the song given together. None of which implies the son is God, but rather, he’s praised because of what he did for God. If Revelation 5:13 were meant to be a quick pass to the audience to let us know that Jesus is of the realm of uncreated things, then why did the worship songs to the Father for being “God, and you created all things” (Revelation 4:8, 11) not also apply to the son, if he too is God and the creator?
The dead and risen lamb who sacrificed his life was not an uncreated thing. Did we really need the Bible to tell us that something which just died is not the uncreated, immortal God?