Jesus: god the son or son of god?

[Cindy]

Kathi

Why does it always say, “I will be his father”?
Do you tell people you meet, “I will be the mother of my children?”

Rev 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;

He is the beginning of God's “creation”.

Georg

[Lightenup]

Quote (Cindy @ May 28 2009,04:24)

Kathi Why does it always say, “I will be his father”? Do you tell people you meet, “I will be the mother of my children?” Rev 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;   He is the beginning of God's “creation”. Georg

Hi Georg,
You ask why it not only says that He is a Father to Him but “will” be a Father to Him.

This whole passage places the Son in a higher position than the angels even when He was made lower than them. The angels never had the type of sonship that the Son had. Not only were they “Father and Son” before the heavens and earth were created but again when the Son was made lower than the angels. This relationship continues even when the Son has conquered sin and comes into the role of the High Priest. They were and always will be Father and Son.

I believe that the Son is a son by birth, the angels are sons by creation. The angels do not share the nature of GOD, the Son does, IMO and thus He is God from GOD because that is what GOD would beget, one of the same nature-full of grace and truth. Being begotten of GOD doesn't mean that He receives His Father's abilities like His power, omniscience, or omnipresence, or eternal existence but He does receive His nature. When we were begotten, we inherited our sonship or daughtership as well as our nature common to mankind. We did not receive the abilities of our parents like their strength and their knowledge when we were born as part of our nature. The tendencies towards them may have been there but not necessarily.

Anyway, I went on a rabbit trail there. His nature is something that I have had on my mind lately.

As far as the Rev 3:14 verse, here it is in many translations. I see this as saying He is the first of anything that has come into being or the originator over anything that has come into being since all was created through Him.

Revelation 3:14

NET ©
“To 1 the angel of the church in Laodicea write the following: 2 “This is the solemn pronouncement of 3 the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the originator 4 of God’s creation:

NIV ©
biblegateway Rev 3:14
“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation.

NASB ©
biblegateway Rev 3:14
“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:

NLT ©
biblegateway Rev 3:14
“Write this letter to the angel of the church in Laodicea. This is the message from the one who is the Amen––the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation:

MSG ©
biblegateway Rev 3:14
Write to Laodicea, to the Angel of the church. God's Yes, the Faithful and Accurate Witness, the First of God's creation, says:

BBE ©
SABDAweb Rev 3:14
And to the angel of the church in Laodicea say: These things says the true and certain witness, the head of God’s new order:

NRSV ©
bibleoremusRev 3:14
“And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the origin of God’s creation:

NKJV ©
biblegateway Rev 3:14
“And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write, ‘These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God:

And there you have my opinion again to give a different perspective to consider.

Kathi

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hi Kathi

Quote (Lightenup @ May 28 2009,11:27)

Being begotten of GOD doesn't mean that He receives His Father's abilities like His power, omniscience, or omnipresence, or eternal existence but He does receive His nature.

Omniscience, Omnipresence, Omnipotence or eternal existence are not “his abilities”, but are intrinsic to Gods nature. Those are attributes of the nature of God that makes him God and none other.

Just as a fish lives in water and is a specific species and every offspring of that particular fish has the same ontology that makes that fish as it is. Some species may be larger, smaller, with scales, without scales, or some may live longer than others. But nature itself proves that every species after its own kind is identical in their ontology.

Jesus is not some sort of demi-god who is not equal to the Father in his nature, that which makes him God. Hebrew Monotheism is against any such teaching!

Blessings WJ

[NickHassan]

Hi WJ,
Spare us the theological follies.
Just scripture thanks.

[Lightenup]

Hi Keith,
I think that you have abilities confused with nature. Nature is something that can be passed on by means of reproduction. Therefore, the nature that you see in the Son is also the nature of the Father. Satan is a liar by nature, God is truth by nature. I believe that the nature of GOD and the Son could simply be the fullness of truth and grace. They both are full of truth and grace and that is not fruits of their spirit but their nature which they share. I would also say that they each share a spirit body type as well as the fruits of the spirit that would automatically be by-products, for the lack of a better word, of a nature that was full of truth and grace.

Jesus is not some sort of a demi anything. He is who He is and to the fullest measure of that…He is not half full of grace and truth, He is full of grace and truth. His Father did not pass on half of His nature to His Son, He received the fullness of that nature-grace and truth within a spirit body. IMO As a Son of GOD, He is a full son of GOD…as full as He can possibly be…not an adopted son who would come by merely declaration who would not share the nature of His Father. He is not a son by declaration only, but a Son by nature-full of grace and truth.

I don't believe that the Son has the “omni” abilities of His Father…He doesn't need them as long as the Father has them. The Father can direct His special “Most High GOD” abilities to work for His purpose through the Son and then through us. IMO I believe that the Father is the Most High GOD alone and the only one with the “omni” abilities.

The “omni's” are not the nature of the Most High GOD but the abilities of the Most High GOD. The fullness of grace and truth is not an ability of GOD, it is the nature of GOD which He can and has passed on to His offspring.

Blessings,
Kathi

[Cindy]

Kathi  I have a question for you, why do you study in the NIV Bible?  Somebody told me that the King James version is the closest to the Greek and Hebrew version. The King James says Rev. 3:14 completely different. That Scripture goes also with
Col. 1:15 and John 1:1 and John 17:5 it all fits. I agree with some that you are saying, but I do not believe that He was born as we are. He was created by the Father, and these Scriptures do prove that.
Peace and Love Irene

[Lightenup]

Hi Irene,
I study mainly with the NASB but I often compare several versions and then do a word study if I think one version is saying a different thing than another one. Many Greek manuscripts have been discovered and more knowledge has been gained since the writings in the KJ Bible. The Holy Spirit is required for gaining understanding. I have found certain errors in the KJ Bible also. So that is why I do not lean on the KJV.

I do think that it is a very different thing to say that the Son was created and then adopted as compared to saying that He was born and has the same nature as the Father. It never says that an angel was made lower than the angels, or that an angel was declared to be the only begotten son, or that an angel became flesh. I do see that angels do not receive worship but I see that the Son does. I also see the term first”born” and not first”created.” We both place the Son as beginning in the beginning of the world and being the one that GOD creates through, so that is the same. What does only begotten mean to you, Irene?

So, there ya go, that is why. I hope that helps.

Love, Kathi

[NickHassan]

Hi,
Lu the OMNIs are theological presumptions.
The KJV is based on the commonest manuscripts Irene and not necessarily the oldest or most correct.

[Lightenup]

Hi Nick,
I understand about the “omni's” being presumptions.  I do believe that the Most High GOD, if not technically omniscient, He would know everything that was possible, more than any other.  He knows the most:) Also, He is the most powerful, and can be wherever He wants to be.

LU

[Cindy]

Kathi

Children are the flesh and blood of their parents, genes and all; that not only makes them equal to their parents, but in many cases it makes them taller, smarter, and stronger; in that sense they are not only the parents equal, but better. The Father in heaven has no equal, he is divine, immortal, so would Jesus have been, had he been born the way you suggest.
He would not have been able to die for us; Paul says, death has “no more” power over him, the reason, God gave him immortality, he could not die for us now, even if he wanted too.
The glory he divested himself from was his nature, spirit; he became lower then the angels by becoming one of us, human.

Georg

[Not3in1]

Hi all,

Interesting thread here….

When speaking of Jesus' nature – don't forget Mary! She did a lot more than just contribute skin.

Jesus was the Son of God, and the son of Man. Scripture doesn't break it down into what parts were what. We are told that Jesus had the nature of God – but we are not told he had 100% of the nature of God (we just assume this – our minds fill in what is not being said). It stands to reason that if Jesus is also the son of Man……he shares that nature as well.

Prior to being born of Mary, we can only speculate as to the “son” of God who became Jesus. In my opinion, there is not much to go on. We certainly can weave our own theories (and good ones at that!), but they are only theories. We are told that Jesus, the Son of God, was born to Mary, a women under the Law. She CONCEIVED and gave birth to this child.

Truth is found in the basics.
Remember….they were fisherman.

Much love to you guys – I continue to be blessed by all these discussions that are carried out so lovingly. It seems like lately, every time I check in (which is here and there), I am encouraged by the amount of patience and love being shown to one another.

Press on towards the goal!
Mandy

[Lightenup]

Quote (Cindy @ May 29 2009,05:40)

Kathi Children are the flesh and blood of their parents, genes and all; that not only makes them equal to their parents, but in many cases it makes them taller, smarter, and stronger; in that sense they are not only the parents equal, but better. The Father in heaven has no equal, he is divine, immortal, so would Jesus have been, had he been born the way you suggest. He would not have been able to die for us; Paul says, death has “no more” power over him, the reason, God gave him immortality, he could not die for us now, even if he wanted too. The glory he divested himself from was his nature, spirit; he became lower then the angels by becoming one of us, human. Georg

Hi Georg,
Our body is our outer man and has a nature of its own and our inner man has a nature of its own, as far as I understand, this inner man. I believe that the nature of the inner man is what becomes as a new creature when we become born again and continues to be renewed to the fullness of Christ.

2 Cor 4:16
16 Therefore we do not lose heart, but though our outer man is decaying, yet our inner man is being renewed day by day.
NASU

When our outer man perishes, our re-created inner man puts on a new imperishable body, a spiritual body. It is that “inner man” that partakes in the divine nature of GOD and the “outer man” will share the glory of the spiritual body. We will never share in the qualities that remain unique to the Most High GOD or the qualities that remain unique to the natural Son though.

2 Peter 1:4
4 For by these He has granted to us His precious and magnificent promises, so that by them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust.
NASU

You wrote:

Quote

The Father in heaven has no equal, he is divine, immortal, so would Jesus have been, had he been born the way you suggest.

I do agree that the Father in heaven has no equal for He alone always existed and He alone possesses immortality. However, I believe that He did reproduce and what He passed on was His divine nature to His Son. It was His unique qualities of a Most High GOD that He did not pass on to His Son, IMO, which includes an eternal past existence and immortality, etc.

There are many qualities that you could not pass on to your son and there were many qualities that you did pass on to your son along with both the nature of his outer man and his inner man. It is both of those natures that are either destroyed or replaced. The perishable outer man is destroyed and replaced by an imperishable outer man, the inner man becomes a new creation, born again by adoption into the family of GOD.

1 Cor 15:40-49
40 There are also heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is one, and the glory of the earthly is another.
41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body;
43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power;
44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.
45 So also it is written, “The first MAN, Adam, BECAME A LIVING SOUL.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.
46 However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual.
47 The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy; and as is the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly.
49 Just as we have borne the image of the earthy, we will also bear the image of the heavenly.
NASU

There is a glory that the earthy body has and a different glory that the spiritual body has. IMO, the Father has a spiritual body which He passed on to the Son through reproduction as well as His divine nature and that is the glory that they shared. The glory of the spiritual body was given up by the Son to come in a perishable body and after His death, He received a spiritual body once again and with it the glory which He had before with GOD.

These are my thoughts, I am not writing a doctrine here, just something to consider.

Kathi

[Cindy]

Quote (Lightenup @ May 30 2009,05:43)

Hi Georg, Our body is our outer man and has a nature of its own and our inner man has a nature of its own, as far as I understand, this inner man.  I believe that the nature of the inner man is what becomes as a new creature when we become born again and continues to be renewed to the fullness of Christ.

You're too much, Kathy.

Georg

[Lightenup]

So, Irene, when Georg says “You're too much” what exactly is that supposed to mean?

Love,
Kathi

[bodhitharta]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 29 2009,06:20)

Hi Kathi Quote (Lightenup @ May 28 2009,11:27) Being begotten of GOD doesn't mean that He receives His Father's abilities like His power, omniscience, or omnipresence, or eternal existence but He does receive His nature. Omniscience, Omnipresence, Omnipotence or eternal existence are not “his abilities”, but are intrinsic to Gods nature. Those are attributes of the nature of God that makes him God and none other. Just as a fish lives in water and is a specific species and every offspring of that particular fish has the same ontology that makes that fish as it is. Some species may be larger, smaller, with scales, without scales, or some may live longer than others. But nature itself proves that every species after its own kind is identical in their ontology. Jesus is not some sort of demi-god who is not equal to the Father in his nature, that which makes him God. Hebrew Monotheism is against any such teaching! Blessings WJ

Please stop using the word ontology because you don't use it correctly.

Ontology is the study of the nature of “being” not the nature of being.

on·tol·o·gy (n-tl-j) KEY

NOUN:

The branch of metaphysics that deals with the nature of being.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (bodhitharta @ May 30 2009,18:24)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 29 2009,06:20) Hi Kathi Quote (Lightenup @ May 28 2009,11:27) Being begotten of GOD doesn't mean that He receives His Father's abilities like His power, omniscience, or omnipresence, or eternal existence but He does receive His nature. Omniscience, Omnipresence, Omnipotence or eternal existence are not “his abilities”, but are intrinsic to Gods nature. Those are attributes of the nature of God that makes him God and none other. Just as a fish lives in water and is a specific species and every offspring of that particular fish has the same ontology that makes that fish as it is. Some species may be larger, smaller, with scales, without scales, or some may live longer than others. But nature itself proves that every species after its own kind is identical in their ontology. Jesus is not some sort of demi-god who is not equal to the Father in his nature, that which makes him God. Hebrew Monotheism is against any such teaching! Blessings WJ Please stop using the word ontology because you don't use it correctly. Ontology is the study of the nature of “being” not the nature of being. on·tol·o·gy    (n-tl-j) KEY   NOUN: The branch of metaphysics that deals with the nature of being.

Hi BD

You should check to make sure of what you are talking about before you make accusations. Is this your purpose on this sight, to critisize and accuse?

The word “ontology” has many “Synonyms”, one of them being…

“the nature of being” Click here!

So my sentence could read…

“But nature itself proves that every species after its own kind is identical in their “nature of being” (ontology).  

Blessings WJ

[NickHassan]

Hi WJ,
So Jesus was God's son.

[bodhitharta]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 31 2009,18:18)

Quote (bodhitharta @ May 30 2009,18:24) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 29 2009,06:20) Hi Kathi Quote (Lightenup @ May 28 2009,11:27) Being begotten of GOD doesn't mean that He receives His Father's abilities like His power, omniscience, or omnipresence, or eternal existence but He does receive His nature. Omniscience, Omnipresence, Omnipotence or eternal existence are not “his abilities”, but are intrinsic to Gods nature. Those are attributes of the nature of God that makes him God and none other. Just as a fish lives in water and is a specific species and every offspring of that particular fish has the same ontology that makes that fish as it is. Some species may be larger, smaller, with scales, without scales, or some may live longer than others. But nature itself proves that every species after its own kind is identical in their ontology. Jesus is not some sort of demi-god who is not equal to the Father in his nature, that which makes him God. Hebrew Monotheism is against any such teaching! Blessings WJ Please stop using the word ontology because you don't use it correctly. Ontology is the study of the nature of “being” not the nature of being. on·tol·o·gy    (n-tl-j) KEY   NOUN: The branch of metaphysics that deals with the nature of being. Hi BD You should check to make sure of what you are talking about before you make accusations. Is this your purpose on this sight, to critisize and accuse? The word “ontology” has many “Synonyms”, one of them being… “the nature of being” Click here! So my sentence could read… “But nature itself proves that every species after its own kind is identical in their “nature of being” (ontology).   Blessings WJ

I didn't mean to hurt your feelings but ontology is the “study of the nature of being”

Any time you see “ology” it means the study of

Bi-ology
Astr-ology
physi-ology
techn-ology

You simply used the word wrong because you were taught to use it wrong.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (bodhitharta @ May 31 2009,21:42)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 31 2009,18:18) Quote (bodhitharta @ May 30 2009,18:24) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 29 2009,06:20) Hi Kathi Quote (Lightenup @ May 28 2009,11:27) Being begotten of GOD doesn't mean that He receives His Father's abilities like His power, omniscience, or omnipresence, or eternal existence but He does receive His nature. Omniscience, Omnipresence, Omnipotence or eternal existence are not “his abilities”, but are intrinsic to Gods nature. Those are attributes of the nature of God that makes him God and none other. Just as a fish lives in water and is a specific species and every offspring of that particular fish has the same ontology that makes that fish as it is. Some species may be larger, smaller, with scales, without scales, or some may live longer than others. But nature itself proves that every species after its own kind is identical in their ontology. Jesus is not some sort of demi-god who is not equal to the Father in his nature, that which makes him God. Hebrew Monotheism is against any such teaching! Blessings WJ Please stop using the word ontology because you don't use it correctly. Ontology is the study of the nature of “being” not the nature of being. on·tol·o·gy    (n-tl-j) KEY   NOUN: The branch of metaphysics that deals with the nature of being. Hi BD You should check to make sure of what you are talking about before you make accusations. Is this your purpose on this sight, to critisize and accuse? The word “ontology” has many “Synonyms”, one of them being… “the nature of being” Click here! So my sentence could read… “But nature itself proves that every species after its own kind is identical in their “nature of being” (ontology).   Blessings WJ I didn't mean to hurt your feelings but ontology is the “study of the nature of being” Any time you see “ology” it means the study of Bi-ology Astr-ology physi-ology techn-ology You simply used the word wrong because you were taught to use it wrong.

Hi BD

My feelings are not hurt, I have considered the source, and pray for you for your constant jabs.

So you deny the source that disagrees with you and the fact that there are synonyms for the word and one of them being “the nature of being”?

WJ

[bodhitharta]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 02 2009,03:33)

Quote (bodhitharta @ May 31 2009,21:42) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 31 2009,18:18) Quote (bodhitharta @ May 30 2009,18:24) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 29 2009,06:20) Hi Kathi Quote (Lightenup @ May 28 2009,11:27) Being begotten of GOD doesn't mean that He receives His Father's abilities like His power, omniscience, or omnipresence, or eternal existence but He does receive His nature. Omniscience, Omnipresence, Omnipotence or eternal existence are not “his abilities”, but are intrinsic to Gods nature. Those are attributes of the nature of God that makes him God and none other. Just as a fish lives in water and is a specific species and every offspring of that particular fish has the same ontology that makes that fish as it is. Some species may be larger, smaller, with scales, without scales, or some may live longer than others. But nature itself proves that every species after its own kind is identical in their ontology. Jesus is not some sort of demi-god who is not equal to the Father in his nature, that which makes him God. Hebrew Monotheism is against any such teaching! Blessings WJ Please stop using the word ontology because you don't use it correctly. Ontology is the study of the nature of “being” not the nature of being. on·tol·o·gy    (n-tl-j) KEY   NOUN: The branch of metaphysics that deals with the nature of being. Hi BD You should check to make sure of what you are talking about before you make accusations. Is this your purpose on this sight, to critisize and accuse? The word “ontology” has many “Synonyms”, one of them being… “the nature of being” Click here! So my sentence could read… “But nature itself proves that every species after its own kind is identical in their “nature of being” (ontology).   Blessings WJ I didn't mean to hurt your feelings but ontology is the “study of the nature of being” Any time you see “ology” it means the study of Bi-ology Astr-ology physi-ology techn-ology You simply used the word wrong because you were taught to use it wrong. Hi BD My feelings are not hurt, I have considered the source, and pray for you for your constant jabs. So you deny the source that disagrees with you and the fact that there are synonyms for the word and one of them being “the nature of being”? WJ

As I said I apologize if you take it as a jab but using words incorrectly can mislead others.

[Author]

Posts