Firstborn of/over all creation

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 07 2011,04:10)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 05 2011,22:09) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 05 2011,08:42) Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 04 2011,20:03) I would like to know how Jesus already had the glory of an ONLY BEGOTTEN Son from the Father when he was flesh if he wasn't “begotten” until after he died. Sure Mike As soon as you can show us a scripture that says his Glory as the Only begotten Son was before he came in the flesh. WJ I showed you one that says he had that glory WHILE he was flesh.  Isn't that enough to make you see he wasn't begotten when he was raised from the dead? mike NO! Because John 17:5 says he returned to the previous Glory he shared with the Father before the world began. WJ

Keith,

Here is another point. In the days of his flesh Jesus manifested His glory ONLY as the Father permitted it. He did not have absolute authority. But the day He was begotten as King-Son He assumed absolute authority.

He assumed absolute authority at His resurrection which is the whole point of the 'begetting' in Psalm 2:6-7. It is about His assumption as absloute King-Son.

Jack

[Istari]

Sophia,
Thank you for understanding.

I started a thread on Fractal Scriptures… And made reference to quite often but not many others here seem to understand the significance of it, a bit like providing a cloth and solution for cleaning dirty DVD's but no one bothers and just make do with skips and judders…never realising the pleasure of a beauty of a clean disk
(true story: A long time ago I borrowed a colleagues tape recorder. When I tried to use it I found it was of very poor quality in recording. I found that the recording head had got filthy dirty with grunge so I cleaned it off and used the system successfully.
On returning it to said colleague i mentioned that I had cleaned it for him.. He went berserk, saying that there was nothing wrong with it. He snatched it back and threatened me with the cost of a new one if he found any thing wrong…. I was gobsmacked at his reaction!!!
The next day, the guy came back and apologised saying he'd not known it work better and sound so great…!
Sometimes, the cleaning up peoples grunge causes them to believe you have caused them harm in their belief – it is only later, when they have tested their cleansed belief, that they realise the beauty and truth of it and the Paucity of what they had become accustomed to and took as truth and normality)

[Istari]

Hi Jack,

Yes, you may or may not have seen that I mentioned as much to dear Kathi some time ago…

For the sake of my own sanity I gave up… It was exactly concerning Jesus being incubated inside God…and that God is like a mother…remember that God created an ADAM … The Woman came about only because the Adam refused all the animals as a companion (Notice that today women are choosing an animal as their companion in preference to a male partner… Is there a Satanic link there?)

[Lightenup]

Istari,
I never used the words 'incubated inside God' did I? Let these words reflect my thoughts:

He was begotten of the Father in a manner inconceivable and inexpressible by men, before any creatures were in being.

I made a comparison to a human pregnancy in the past because that is the closest example of what I was thinking, however I do not know the details of how God could have a literal offspring and I never said that I did. I believe that is the message of how the Son of God is the only begotten Son of God…He is a literal offspring, begotten before creation. I do believe that God had within Him an eternal offspring in a manner inconceivable and inexpressible by men, before any creatures were in being. So, if you can get past the idea that God has to do just as man does to have an offspring which limits God, then you might be able to understand better.

So, I will keep this post handy and repost it to you until you seem to understand what I am saying.

If you or Jack do not agree, that is fine, I know that many of the early church father's do as I have shown in this thread.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ April 06 2011,10:51)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 05 2011,11:40) Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ April 04 2011,13:47) Quote (Lightenup @ April 05 2011,06:30) Or 'today' could be according to eternity where there is only today, just an eternal one. Gobbledygook Spoken like a man that has been solidly trained in “gobbledygook”, what with all his years as a trinni.   Jack, thanks for your answer on Sheol.  I disagree with you, but thank you for answering my question. mike Mike, Please answer how the soothsayer called Samuel up from sheol if Samuel “ceased to exist?” Explain why God condemned soothsayers for calling up the dead out of sheol if the dead “ceased to exist?” Jack

Jack,

I never said they ceased to exist. I believe quite the opposite. I believe sheol is a “storage place” for unconscious souls until they are raised again by having God's spirit put back in them.

I was asking where all those are if sheol is now gone. Where is Samuel now, for example?

mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 06 2011,11:10)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 05 2011,22:09) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 05 2011,08:42) Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 04 2011,20:03) I would like to know how Jesus already had the glory of an ONLY BEGOTTEN Son from the Father when he was flesh if he wasn't “begotten” until after he died. Sure Mike As soon as you can show us a scripture that says his Glory as the Only begotten Son was before he came in the flesh. WJ I showed you one that says he had that glory WHILE he was flesh.  Isn't that enough to make you see he wasn't begotten when he was raised from the dead? mike NO! Because John 17:5 says he returned to the previous Glory he shared with the Father before the world began. WJ

Hi Keith,

Are you making my point for me?  If John and the believers were able to behold Jesus' glory as an only begotten Son from the Father while he was on the earth, then he was an only begotten Son from the Father while he was on the earth.

Now you have added a brilliant point that since Jesus was raised to his previous glory, and is now the only begotten Son of God, then he must have also been that previously, right?

The thing we all agree about is that Jesus NOW has the glory of the only begotten Son of God, right?  But John 1:14 says he also had it on earth, so you'll have to adjust your thinking to align with the scriptures, right?  And the point you made in this post demonstrates that since he was raised to the glory he had, and that glory now is as the only begotten Son of God, then that must also have been the same glory he had before the creation of the world.

Thanks for the pointer.

mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 06 2011,11:11)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 05 2011,22:13) Quote (Istari @ April 05 2011,08:51) The false speaker will never admit they spoke falsely nor that the other spoke truth so it must be accepted in oneself. Yeah, you could just live with it.  Or you could start a poll exposing the false speaking like I did.  Maybe a little spotlight on the subject will make them think twice the next time. mike Maybe you will think twice before you accuse someone of lying and create a thread to slander them which in turn slandered Kath also. WJ

What do I have to think twice about? I'M not the one who voted “ONLY Keith”.

I'll do a thread like that each time Keith…………..just so you know you'll be put in the spotlight each time.

mike

[SimplyForgiven]

Quote (Sophia @ April 05 2011,14:10)

~WJ, LU, KJ, MB, IS, SF, I have been reading here, on & off, about a Year now, & it's about time I spoke. I must say I am SHOCKED at the manner in which You have treated some People. As you waste your time “Battling Truth” [having 'fun' with one another] – The “Orphans and Widow's” [James] are left ALONE! [If you know what that means?]. (No, it doesn't mean what I assume you would think it to mean). And have you ever read this – [2ND Timothy 2:14, & James 1:27]: ***(They will be) “Lovers of themself, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,  without natural affection, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, no lovers of good, traitors, headstrong, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God;” *** “Remind them of these things, charging them in the sight of the Lord, that they do not argue about words, to no profit, to the subverting of those who hear” Perhaps you have bypassed those Verses? PLEASE. Do a favor….[Get off your Pedestals]~

Hey Sophia!

Did she mention me!! lol. niceeeeee
I have a huge pedestal that i have fallen off from… and currently going through hell.

I am Mean, and Arrogant at times, not that i can do anything about that.
Maybe, spiritualy you must see that this forums brings out the abosulte worst of people.

It brings a little darkness from our hearts as we continue to shout out our truths over one another.

What do you expect to change?
Let the Lord deal with such situations, whom can wrestle against his Will anyways, (especially since everyone here claims to follow God)
The only thing to do, is for all of us to abandon this forum. but of course thats not going to happen today, maybe tommorow.

mann to bad I missed this thread….
Dont worry, the longer you are here, the more it willl contaminate you as well.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Lightenup @ April 06 2011,17:36)

Istari, I never used the words 'incubated inside God' did I?  Let these words reflect my thoughts: He was begotten of the Father in a manner inconceivable and inexpressible by men, before any creatures were in being. I made a comparison to a human pregnancy in the past because that is the closest example of what I was thinking, however I do not know the details of how God could have a literal offspring and I never said that I did. I believe that is the message of how the Son of God is the only begotten Son of God…He is a literal offspring, begotten before creation. I do believe that God had within Him an eternal offspring in a manner inconceivable and inexpressible by men, before any creatures were in being.  So, if you can get past the idea that God has to do just as man does to have an offspring which limits God, then you might be able to understand better. So, I will keep this post handy and repost it to you until you seem to understand what I am saying. If you or Jack do not agree, that is fine, I know that many of the early church father's do as I have shown in this thread.

Hi Kathi,

Excellent post.    The problem lies with these Hebrews and Acts scriptures.  These guys read them as if Paul's saying “this is the day”.  But he's not, if you read them in context, as I've many times showed them.

And although I'm not as enamored of the early church fathers as you are, it really says something that not one of them thought Paul was saying what these guys think Paul was saying.

The other problem is that these guys insist the “begetting” of Jesus must be a “metaphorical” begetting.  But they've never shown any reason why.  There is nothing in scripture to support the theory that God meant anything different in Psalm 2:7 than that He brought forth a Son from and for Himself.

God surely knew how the Israelites understood the word “yalad”.  Why would He use that word if He really meant something different?  

But these are all issues that THEY have to answer to.  We don't really have anything to answer to because we are simply reading the scriptures and taking them for what they say.  If THEY want to say “beget” meant something different for Jesus, then it is THEY who must support that claim.  Because, as you have so wisely pointed out before, the default meaning must always apply unless there is evidence to the contrary.

peace and love,
mike

[Lightenup]

Thanks Mike!

When I was shown the truth of the literal Son from eternity, I didn't have to dissect scriptures.  It really wasn't hard once I opened my heart to the possibility, truly opened my heart, and putting my past acceptance of a doctrine on the altar, then the scales figuratively fell from my eyes and I began to see that the Son was God BECAUSE He was 'Son of God.'  I didn't need to dissect Psalms 2:7 or any other scripture…this truth was birthed in my spirit and that led to greater understanding of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and what that meant.  

I find that the early church fathers have a lot to say about this truth.  From my experience with Christianity today, There seems to be an emphasis that I don't think the early church father's emphasized.  They speak of the Son as eternally co-existing with the Father and the Spirit, three persons eternally co-existing with each other as one God yet each fully God.  Maybe it is just wording but I think it is more accurate to say that the Son was eternally contained within the Father until the time of His begetting when He began His service with the Father, alongside of the Father through their Holy Spirit before creation.  That wording, that I believe is more accurate, explains how one is Father and how one is Son and not partners of some sort.  Also, it explains how the Son is also eternal yet Son.  It explains how one is greater because Father, and how one is lessor merely by being Son and no other reason and both are eternal.  And if the Spirit is their actual inner spirit that they contain within them, and can come from them without separation from them, and go anywhere or even everywhere if that be possible, then their spirit actually carries who they are and the power of who they are to other places than where their presence actually is, the their Spirit is a manifestation of their will, not having a will of its own as if the spirit was also a person but more like an inner-person sorta like man's spirit is his 'inner-man.'

peace and love to you too,
Kathi

[Istari]

Mike and Kathi,

Kathi, you said that the Son was inside the Father before he was Begotten as the Son. Is this not what 'Incubate' means?

I think that seeing it written as 'Incubate' has made you realise your error – else you would have embraced the term?

For sure, say, 'God entertained the idea of a Son' before creation began… (Where is Gene?) for he knew that a Saviour would be required (Hey, doesn't even man employ 'Failsafes' in systems he builds, 'Failovers', Error correction, Disaster Recovery, Contingency Planning and Business Continuity plans – and are we not made in the image of God?)

Consider this, did God know that Adam, the man, would sin, or that ADAM the species, would sin?
For sure the latter at least… Therefore a Saviour would be required at some point in time.

Revelation tells us that many were considered for that saviourship but none were found worthy – only that one whom we know now as Jesus Christ.
Revelation MUST NOT BE READ AS LITERAL… it is SYMBOLIC, therefore 'the Lamb that was as slaughtered from before time' means 'The Saviour who WOULD BE' … Whomever that would be… Whomever that would be – he would be 'The Messiah', 'The Christ', 'The [true] Son of God'

Kathi, Scriptures clearly shows that there will be many 'Sons of God', 'Brothers Of/With [the] Christ', and therefore 'Heirs to God'…

Kathi, How does a humankind become a [True] Son of God?

Kathi, when he is BEGOTTEN… as Jesus was Begotten:
Acts 13:33, 'God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that he has RAISED UP (begotten) Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm: 'You are my Son, Today I have begotten you'

And Romans 1:3-4:
'concerning Jesus Christ, our Lord, who was born the Son of God… in the flesh …through the seed of David and DECLARED (Begotten) to be Son of God with Power (The True Son) according to the Holy Spirit BY THE RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD…
verse 7: (as man others) goes on to say: 'Grace to you and peace from GOD our FATHER…. AND….the LORD Jesus Christ.
Viz: The Father is GOD – the Son is Lord
Kathi: who are we told to worship?
Glorify the Son… Worship God – and God alone!!

John 20:17 also testifies: 'Jesus said to [Mary] 'Do not cling to me, for I have not yet Ascended to MY FATHER; but go tell my brethren, 'I am Ascending to MY FATHER and YOUR FATHER, and to MY GOD and YOUR GOD''
Jesus is quite clear that the FATHER is HIS GOD and THEIR GOD (Contrast that to later on when THOMAS says 'MY LORD and MY GOD' (Emphasize 'My' – not 'OUR Lord and OUR God' Trinnies read carefully!!)

[Lightenup]

Hi Istari,

I know that we do not understand the same way. Perhaps you might enjoy reading this:

http://www.reformedreader.org/rbb/gill/eternalsonshipofchrist.htm

As you can see, this disagreement has been going on for centuries. I am certainly not alone in my general understanding.

BTW, read John Gill's writings for some help with your questions…he is the expert, not me. He's not perfect but he is pretty good.

http://www.reformedreader.org/rbb/gill/gillindex.htm

Near the bottom are some links to his writings.

Kathi

[Baker]

Hi Kathi and Mike!  I am reading your posts, and smiling.  It seems that most here don't understand that Jesus came into existing long before the world was.  I also found that no matter what Scriptures one puts in front of them, they usually reason it away, one wau or another….
is it not that way because they can't open their hearts, or refuse to open their hearts?  Maybe it's not their time to understand.  But I am German and I don't give up easy!!!!!!..keep up the good work………..
Peace and Love Irene

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Kathi said:

Quote

When I was shown the truth of the literal Son from eternity, I didn't have to dissect scriptures.

Kathi,

If Jesus is a literal Son “from eternity”, then you must accept the erroneous Catholic doctrine of eternal generation. Come on!

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ April 07 2011,12:15)

Kathi said: Quote When I was shown the truth of the literal Son from eternity, I didn't have to dissect scriptures. Kathi, If Jesus is a literal Son “from eternity”, then you must accept the erroneous Catholic doctrine of eternal generation. Come on!

Thats true!

Because most of the Forefathers believed Jesus is from eternity the Son of God with no beginning. Which I agree.

Eternal generation does not mean that he had any kind of beginning but that he was always proceeding from within the Father as the Word that was always with the Father yet the Father was always in him for they are one in essence, being and nature, all that makes God God.

Kathi however thinks that he had some kind of a beginning as being the “offspring” of God yet those words are not found among most of the Forefathers.

Neither do they believe the Father and Son are 2 gods or beings.

WJ

[Lightenup]

Hi Keith and Jack,
I have made a topic that is about that here:

https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….73;st=0

I have come to understand what some mean by that terms eternal generation and eternally begotten. The understanding differs from person to person.

This is what I used to think it meant:
The Son was always begotten and co-existed with the Father and Holy Spirit eternally. That didn't make sense to me, so I sought out what could have been meant by that by reading the writings of the early church fathers.

Now, I believe that eternally generated is different than begotten before the ages, or eternally begotten.

Eternal generation as I understand it means that the Father always contained an offspring until He was eternally begotten or in other words, begotten during eternity…before the ages.

Keith, I am glad that you see that some forefathers agree as to the Son being a literal offspring.

Kathi

[Lightenup]

Keith,

Quote

Neither do they believe the Father and Son are 2 gods or beings.

Do you believe in God the Father Almighty?

Do you believe in God the Son Almighty?

Kathi

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Lightenup @ April 07 2011,12:34)

Hi Keith and Jack, I have made a topic that is about that here: https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….73;st=0 I have come to understand what some mean by that terms eternal generation and eternally begotten.  The understanding differs from person to person. This is what I used to think it meant: The Son was always begotten and co-existed with the Father and Holy Spirit eternally.  That didn't make sense to me, so I sought out what could have been meant by that by reading the writings of the early church fathers. Now, I believe that eternally generated is different than begotten before the ages, or eternally begotten. Eternal generation as I understand it means that the Father always contained an offspring until He was eternally begotten or in other words, begotten during eternity…before the ages. Keith, I am glad that you see that some forefathers agree as to the Son being a literal offspring. Kathi

Kathi

Are you familiar with the word “consubstantial”?

It was used of the Forefathers up to the 3rd century when it is explained in the “Athanasian Creed”.

The Athanasian Creed is the final blow to the “Arians” and is still used by the true church today.

John Gill shows the following Forefathers who believed in the “eternal generation” of Jesus and the “consubstantial” relationship he had with the Son…

For Eternal Generation, etc.

Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, Clemens of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, Gregory of Neoccesaria, Dionysius of Alexandria, the three hundred and eighteen Nicene Fathers; Athanasius, Alexander bishop of Alexandria, Epiphanius, Hilary, Faustinus, Gregory of Nazianzum, Basil, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Jerom, Ruffinus, Cyril of Jerusalem, besides the many hundreds of bishops and presbyters assembled at different times and in different places, as, at Syrmium, Antioch, Arminum, Seleucia, and Constantinople, and elsewhere;

Blessings!

Keith

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Lightenup @ April 07 2011,12:39)

Keith, Quote Neither do they believe the Father and Son are 2 gods or beings. Do you believe in God the Father Almighty? Do you believe in God the Son Almighty? Kathi

Yep

But as the Bible and the “Athanasian” creed states “There is only “One True God almighty”!

Two can be One and Jesus said he and the Father are.

They are “One Eternal”, “One Lord”, “One God”, “One Almighty”, “One King of Kings”, “One Light”, “One Life”, “One Rock”, “One Creator” “One beginning and end”, “One First and Last” and One essence, substance, and all that makes God, God.

WJ

[Lightenup]

Keith,

Consubstantiality is a term used in Latin Christian christology, coined by Tertullian in Against Hermogenes 44, used to translate the Greek term homoousios. “Consubstantiality” describes the relationship among the Divine persons of the Christian Trinity and connotes that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are “of one being” in that the Son is “generated” (“born” or “begotten”) “before all ages” or “eternally” of the Father's own being, from which the Spirit also eternally “proceeds.”

I agree with this.  The Son and the Spirit are of one being-the Father.

found: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consubstantiality

[Author]

Posts