Begotten god

[Lightenup]

Quote (JustAskin @ Sep. 04 2010,19:50)

WJ, Kathi, Terms of reference (1): “[The] God – The Supreme Being” There is no such thing as a “Begotten God”. A God is not begotten. A God IS. Terms of reference (2): “[A] God – A Powerful and Mighty Person, A Hero, One invested with overarching Authority, one who is above all in his Class” Here, such “a God” can become, can be Begotten, created… Kathi, you want to say that Jesus is [THE-A (Hybrid)] God. By which definition, by which term. Don't confuse your readers (nor your own mind!)

JA,
When are you going to see that according to your 'mighty one' definition of theos…MANY fit that 'mighty one' category. When scripture says monogenes theos, then ONLY ONE fits in the category. Mighty one is NOT the definition of the theos in monogenes theos.

[Lightenup]

Quote (JustAskin @ Sep. 04 2010,19:53)

Kathi, Please explain what you mean by “Some become theos by grace and some by nature (the only begotten theos)”. Did you just make that up? When did anyone BECOME God by grace (Who / When)? and When did anyone BECOME God by Nature (Who / When)?

JA,
OK, because you said please

Read this about those called theos because of grace and the one called theos by nature:

Quote

Ver. 33–36.“Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I showed you from My Father; for which of those works do ye stone Me? ” “For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy; and because that thou being a man makest thyself God”; hear His answer; “Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your Law, I said, Ye are gods?” “If the Scripture called them gods unto whom the word of God came, “And the Scripture cannot be broken: say ye of Him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest,” &c., N.T. The comment looks as if this had been read. how say ye that I blaspheme, because I said, I am the Son of God?” What He saith is of this kind: “If those who have received this honor by grace, are not found fault with for calling themselves gods, how can He who hath this by nature deserve to be rebuked?” Yet He spake not so, but proved it at a later time, having first relaxed and yielded somewhat in His discourse, and said, “Whom the Father hath sanctified and sent.” And when He had softened their anger, He bringeth forward the plain assertion. For a while, that His speech might be received, He spoke in a humbler strain, but afterwards He raised it higher, saying, Ver. 37, 38. “If I do not the works of My Father, believe Me not; but if I do, though ye believe not Me, believe the works.” Seest thou how He proveth what I said, that He is in nothing inferior to the Father, but in every way equal to Him? For since it was impossible to see His Essence, from the equality and sameness of the works He affordeth a proof of unvaryingness as to Power. And what, tell me, shall we believe? [3.] “That I am in the Father, and the Father in Me.”16521652 “that ye may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him,” N.T. “For I am nothing other than what the Father is, yet still Son; He nothing other than what I am, yet still Father. And if any man know Me, he knoweth the Father, and if he knoweth the Father, he hath learnt also the Son.” Now were the power inferior, then also what relateth to the knowledge would be false, for it is not possible to become acquainted with one substance or power by means of another.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf114.iv.lxiii.html

[Lightenup]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 04 2010,16:17)

Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 04 2010,10:24) I like to add these 'unbegotten God' terms that I find in the writings of church father's.  This excerpt is talking about 1 Cor 8 where Paul is discussing  how there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is one God, the Father…and one Lord, Jesus Christ.  I think that St. Chrysostom has something worthy to say in his explanation and it would be worth your time to read the webpage.  This page has helped me understand many things: Quote [6.] Nor yet, if you observe, hath he distributed the names as if belonging exclusively, assigning to the Son the name Lord, and to the Father, God. For the Scripture useth also often to interchange them; as when it saith, (Ps. cx. 1.) “The Lord saith unto My Lord;” and again, (Ps. lxv. 8.) “Wherefore God Thy God hath appointed Thee;” and, (Rom. ix. 5.) “Of Whom is Christ according to the flesh, Who is God over all.” And in many instances you may see these names changing their places. Besides, if they were allotted to each nature severally, and if the Son were not God, and God as the Father, yet continuing a Son: after saying, “but to us there is but One God,” it would have been superfluous, his adding the word “Father,” with a view to declare the Unbegotten. For the word of God was sufficient to explain this, if it were such as to denote Him only. And this is not all, but there is another remark to make: that if you say, “Because it is said ‘One God,’ therefore the word God doth not apply to the Son;” observe that the same holds of the Son also. For the Son also is called “One Lord,” yet we do not maintain that therefore the term Lord applies to Him alone. So then, the same force which the expression “One” has, applied to the Son, it has also, applied to the Father. And as the Father is not thrust out from being the Lord, in the same sense as the Son is the Lord, because He, the Son, is spoken of as one Lord; so neither does it cast out the Son from being God, in the same sense as the Father is God, because the Father is styled One God. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf112.iv.xxi.html Hi Kathi I like his explanation for 1 Cor 8:6 and think he is spot on. I highlighted the part that I have brought up to Mike and t8 which is a point that is ignored. But in speaking of the “unbegotten” again St. Chrysostom does not hold the same view as you for he also says… St. Chrysostom 347-407 “What then do I say? THAT THIS FIRST “WAS,” APPLIED TO “THE WORD,” IS ONLY INDICATIVE OF HIS ETERNAL BEING, (for “In the beginning,” he saith, “was the Word,”) and that the second “was,” (“and the Word was with God,”) denotes His relative Being. For since to be eternal and without beginning is most peculiar to God, this he puts first; and then, lest any one hearing that He was “in the beginning,” should assert, that He was “unbegotten” also, he immediately remedies this by saying, before he declares what He was, that He was “with God.” AND HE HAS PREVENTED ANY ONE FROM SUPPOSING, “that this “Word” is simply such a one as is either UTTERED  προφορικὸν. or CONCEIVED,   ἐ νδιάθετον. by the addition, as I beforesaid, of the article, as well as by this second expression. For he does not say, was “in God,” but was “with God”: declaring to us His eternity as to person. ὑ πόστασιν. Then, as he advances, he has more clearly revealed it, by adding, that this “Word” also “was God.” Source Enjoy! WJ

Hi Keith,
I agree, Chrysostom explained 1 Cor 8:6 well.

What you put up regarding John 1:1 does not give a complete understanding of the begetting of the Word according to Chrysostom and it is impossible to portray anyone of these church father's complete understanding in just an excerpt. That is why we need to include the source as you have. I do believe that he thinks the Son to have an origin and a cause, see here:

Quote

“He sat” (saith he) “on the right hand of the Majesty on high.” What is this “on high”? Doth he enclose God in place? Away with such a thought! but just as, when he saith, “on the right hand,” he did not describe Him as having figure, but showed His equal dignity with the Father; so, in saying “on high,” he did not enclose Him there, but expressed the being higher than all things, and having ascended up above all things. That is, He attained even unto the very throne of the Father: as therefore the Father is on high, so also is He. For the “sitting together” implies nothing else than equal dignity. But if they say, that He said, “Sit Thou,” we may ask them, What then? did He speak to Him standing? Moreover, he said not that He commanded, not that He enjoined, but that “He said”: for no other reason, than that thou mightest not think Him without origin and without cause. For that this is why he said it, is evident from the place of His sitting. For had he intended to signify inferiority, he would not have said, “on the right hand,” but on the left hand.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf114.v.vi.html

[Lightenup]

Here is an informing webpage from the writings of early Christians. In it is mentioned the 'begotten God,' also talks about the fasts and feasts to observe, including Jesus' birthday and the Passover and where in the OT the Son is spoken about and/or seen.

Quote

the Lord Jesus sent on us the gift of the Holy Ghost, and we were filled with His energy, and we “spake with new tongues, as that Spirit did suggest to us;”31333133 Acts ii. 4. and we preached both to Jews and Gentiles, that He is the Christ of God, who is “determined by Him to be the Judge of quick and dead.”31343134 Acts x. 42. To Him did Moses bear witness, and said: “The Lord received fire from the Lord, and rained it down.”31353135 Gen. xix. 24. Him did Jacob see as a man, and said: “I have seen God face to face, and my soul is preserved.”31363136 Gen. xxxii. 30 Him did Abraham entertain, and acknowledge to be the Judge, and his Lord.31373137 Gen. xviii. 25, 27 Him did Moses see in the bush;31383138 Ex. iii. 2 concerning Him did he speak in Deuteronomy: “A Prophet will the Lord your God raise up unto you out of your brethren, like unto me; Him shall ye hear in all things, whatsoever He shall say unto you. And it shall be, that every soul that will not hear that Prophet, shall be destroyed from among his people.”31393139 Deut. xviii. 15. Him did Joshua the son of Nun see, as the captain of the Lord’s host, in armour, for their assistance against Jericho; to whom he fell down, and worshipped, as a servant does to his master.31403140 Josh. v. 14. Him Samuel knew as the “Anointed of God,”31413141 1 Sam. xii. 3. and thence named the priests and the kings the anointed. Him David knew, and sung an hymn concerning Him, “A song concerning the Beloved;”31423142 Ps. xlv. and adds in his person, and says, “Gird Thy sword upon Thy thigh, O Thou who art mighty in Thy beauty and renown: go on, and prosper, and reign, for the sake of truth, and meekness, and righteousness; and Thy right hand shall guide Thee after a wonderful manner. Thy darts are sharpened, O Thou that art mighty; the people shall fall under Thee in the heart of the king’s enemies. Wherefore God, Thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above Thy fellows.” Concerning Him also spake Solomon, as in His person: “The Lord created me the beginning of His ways, for His works: before the world He founded me, in the beginning before He made the earth, before the fountains of waters came, before the mountains were fastened; He begat me before all the hills.”31433143 Prov. viii. 22–25. And again: “Wisdom built herself an house.”31443144 Prov. ix. 1. Concerning Him also Isaiah said: “A Branch shall come out of the root of Jesse, and a Flower shall spring out of his root.” And, “There shall be a root of Jesse; and He that is to rise to reign over the Gentiles, in Him shall the Gentiles trust.”31453145 Isa. xi. 1, 10. And Zechariah says:31463146 One V. ms. inserts: “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion.” “Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, just, and having salvation; meek, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt, the foal of an ass.”31473147 Zech ix. 9 Him Daniel describes as “the Son of man coming to the Father,”31483148 Dan. vii. 13 and receiving all judgment and honour from Him; and as “the stone cut out of the mountain without hands, and becoming a great mountain, and filling the whole earth,”31493149 Dan. ii. 34 dashing to pieces the many governments of the smaller countries, and the polytheism of gods, but preaching the one God, and ordaining the monarchy of the Romans. Concerning Him also did Jeremiah prophesy, saying: “The Spirit before His face, Christ the Lord, was taken in their snares: of whom we said, Under His shadow 449 we shall live among the Gentiles.”31503150 Lam. iv. 20 Ezekiel also, and the following prophets, affirm everywhere that He is the Christ, the Lord, the King, the Judge, the Lawgiver, the Angel of the Father, the only-begotten God. Him therefore do we also preach to you, and declare Him to be God the Word, who ministered to His God and Father for the creation of the universe. By believing in Him you shall live, but by disbelieving you shall be punished. For “he that is disobedient to the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf07.ix.vi.iii.html

You have to go to the webpage to actually read about the feasts. Enjoy!

[barley]

Quote (JustAskin @ Aug. 25 2010,07:48)

The Word “God” is a TITLE … Not a Person. It means “Mighty One”… There is nothing Suspicious, odd, strange, corrupt, etc about the verse. It means “The Only Begotten Mighty One”. There is nothing to query – no depths to Plumb. Please understand this and you will understand a great deal more… Please.

Good point.

[Author]

Posts