- This topic has 713 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
Perhaps you need to retake a Biology course if an offspring within a parent looks like a head growing out of the parent or an eternal extension.
Kathi, and eternally generated son means he is connected to the thing that is generating him. As soon as he becomes his own person and sits next to God, then he is not being generated anymore. So it is that you are the one who needs a Biology lesson. Yeshua is begotten and sits at the right-hand of the one true God. He is not attached to God as an offshoot, or some growth that comes from the source. Yeshua is a person which means a son. In fact he is THE son. The prototype son. And we are invited to be sons of God. We are not and will not be God either.
Kathi, have you even won one point here?
I think you corrected me once as to how John 8:42 is exactly worded, but that correction did not change my message one iota. That message being, that the Father is the one true God and Yeshua his son is the Lord and the messiah.
Personally if I lost every point I made in a debate, I would not continue because that would be the definition of insanity and I would feel like a fool. Do you think that if you are proven wrong every day on the same point, that one day you will wake up and it will suddenly be right through sheer persistence? I am shaking my head. A lie will be a lie for all eternity. And it is true today as it was yesterday and will be tomorrow that eternal life is to know the only true God and his son. That will not change Kathi. But you can change though. Up to you.
Feel free to pray this Kathi. If you mean it, it will be a great place to start in getting some help.
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.
@t8
And WHERE did I ever use this term “eternally generated?”
So far, you are not very impressive in your comprehension, claiming that I use terms like eternally generated is a perfect example. It is no wonder you are so messed up in your doctrine considering you poor comprehension of the written word.@t8
you asked:Kathi, have you even won one point here?
Yes, several.
The main one that there are two who are called theos in scripture who share dominion over all creation for ever and ever.@t8
you say this but you still don’t know the Son:eternal life is to know the only true God and his son
If you knew the Son, you would know that eternal life is to know two who are called theos in scripture, in this particular verse in John 17, one is referred to as the only true theos, the Father and the other theos is referred to as Jesus Christ who came out of the Father and was the eternal life that was with the Father from the beginning.
@t8
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.
Good prayer. I have accepted that it is not I that can change you. My hope is to challenge the reader from buying into your small view of Christ.
And WHERE did I ever use this term “eternally generated?”
Don’t know that you have ever said those exact words, but you teach it. You teach the doctrine of eternal generation. So yes I do comprehend what you are teaching.
The doctrine of eternal generation along with the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit are the basis of the Trinity Doctrine which formed many of the creeds, especially the Roman Catholic ones. While you do not teach a Trinity, you certainly advocate a doctrine very similar to the Binity which actually was a doctrine that preceded the Trinity. The Spirit was added some 40 or more years later and the Binity became the Trinity. Perhaps in 40 years you will be a Trinitarian after much debate. History does repeat sometimes.
You believe in the son always proceeding from the Father. That is the man-made doctrine of the eternal generation of the son.
@t8
you said:You believe in the son always proceeding from the Father. That is the man-made doctrine of the eternal generation of the son.
I don’t believe you understand the term ‘eternally begotten’ as written in a form of the Nicene Creed. When the Father says about the Son, “Today, I have begotten you” in Heb. 11, that word ‘begotten’ is written in the perfect, indicative, active sense in the Greek. I know this is complicated but it doesn’t imply a continuous action, it implies a continuous result of a completed action.
Here is an explanation of this:
Perfect Tense
The basic thought of the perfect tense is that the progress of an action has been completed and the results of the action are continuing on, in full effect. In other words, the progress of the action has reached its culmination and the finished results are now in existence. Unlike the English perfect, which indicates a completed past action, the Greek perfect tense indicates the continuation and present state of a completed past action.Indicative Mood
The indicative mood is a statement of fact or an actual occurrence from the writer’s or speaker’s perspective.Active Voice
If the subject of the sentence is executing the action, then the verb is referred to as being in the active voice.
From: http://www.ntgreek.org/learn_nt_greek/verbs1.htmIn my understanding, it is like a mother saying to a group of people, “To which of you have I ever said: today I have begotten you?” That word ‘begotten’ was a completed action and the result remains to this day. She would be talking about her child that she brought forth on the day of their birth, not about a child that she continues to birth. That would be ridiculous.
If you read the term ‘eternally begotten’ and falsely understand ‘continually begetting’ you have really misunderstood the term.
LU, you have departed the simplicity there is in Christ and have chosen to babble on about doctrines that are not written, but puff peoples egos up with so-called higher education and wisdom which is really foolishness in God’s eyes.
When we read genealogies we read about people begetting others right. So God begat a son too.
Simple.
All this so-called arguments about the son being eternally generated etc are really disguised attacks against this most simple yet important of truths, that Jesus is the son of God. Islam says God has no son. Roman Catholic doctrine says that Jesus is God and because they believe not that he is his own Father (which we also believe), therefore they have to deny in deed that he is the son.
The good news is that the Gates of Hell will not prevail against the truth that Jesus is the son of God. And upon that rock Jesus built his Church and I stand on this rock when I say that Jesus is the son of God and the only begotten of the Father. I stand with Peter, Paul, John, and Jesus about him being the true son of God and that his Father is the one true God. No excuses it is clear and simple to understand.
You can oppose this all you like, but you have already lost LU because you argument is not sitting on the rock that Jesus built his Church on.
If you knew the Son, you would know that eternal life is to know two who are called theos in scripture, in this particular verse in John 17, one is referred to as the only true theos, the Father and the other theos is referred to as Jesus Christ who came out of the Father and was the eternal life that was with the Father from the beginning.
lol. Let me tell you what you just said in another way.
If you knew the Son, you would know that eternal life is to know two who are called theos in scripture, in this particular verse in John 17, one is referred to as the only true theos, the Father and the other is not the only true theos, who is Jesus Christ.
Three words for you LU: oxymoron, contradiction, babble.
The only true God is the Father that is clear. Jesus said it and I hear his voice in this matter.
@t8
Sad that you do not want to understand what ‘eternally begotten’ means but you just want to ‘slam’ me for using ‘higher education that puffs one up’ when I expose your lack of understanding to one of the very things you seem to have devoted your website to discredit. I thought a man once corrected would accept correction with humility and gratitude. You simply do not understand the trinity doctrine that you spend so much of your time discrediting. Sounds like a waste of time when you realize that.For instance, once again…the doctrine does not teach that Jesus is continually being begotten as you thought…the doctrine doesn’t say that He came from Himself, etc.
If you are going to argue against something so vehemently, it would be wise to correctly understand what you are arguing against don’t you think??
Sad that you do not want to understand what ‘eternally begotten’ means but you just want to ‘slam’ me for using ‘higher education that puffs one up’ when I expose your lack of understanding
I am all ears if you can show me the scripture. But there are countless views that I do not have time to explore. But if I am shown a scripture and it seems to say what you are saying, of course I will explore. Otherwise what comes from the spirit of mankind is not from the spirit of God.
You have heard my views Kathi, so answer me this question. Do I believe Jesus when he said:
“Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.”
Yes or no.
@t8
you said:
You have heard my views Kathi, so answer me this question. Do I believe Jesus when he said:
“Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.”
Yes or no.
Yes, you believe what the verse says but you do not know them as God with God in the beginning. Rather you believe that a godly one was with God in the beginning. Therefore, since you deny that Jesus was God with God in the beginning, you do not know the Jesus that the verse in John 17 is referring to. That is why I said, yes, you believe that eternal life is to know the only true God, the Father and Jesus Christ whom He has sent, but you do not know the Jesus who was God with God in the beginning. You have another Jesus than the one the verse you keep repeating requires you to know for eternal life.
Please select which one is your understanding-
a) Jesus was not God with the God in the beginning.
b) Jesus was God who was with the God in the beginning.If the Jesus you claim to know is a, not b, and the Jesus I claim to know is b, not a…one of us does not know the Jesus Christ whom has been sent and therefore does not have eternal life as defined in John 17.
@t8
you said:I am all ears if you can show me the scripture.
The one who was eternal life, was with the Father from the beginning:
1 John
1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)Thank you LU.
Next question:
Do YOU believe Jesus when he said:
“Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.”
Yes or no. Please no devil in the details. Let your yes be yes and your no be no.
The one who was eternal life, was with the Father from the beginning:
1 John
1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)What about the eternal life that is manifest in all of God’s children? Are we God too then?
Jesus was the first, there is no denying that. But it is not meant to be taken as meaning he is God. No, he was the first to be with God and with eternal life. The eternal life that God gives was first manifest in the one that was with God in the beginning.
If I have eternal life Kathi, does that mean I existed for as long as God? Am I being eternally generated? Am I the same age as God?
@Grasshopper
Glad you are following along but this is a private debate…you aren’t supposed to post in a private debate unless you are one of the two who are debating, sorry. Thanks for respecting that 🙂@t8
You must have missed this question:Please select which one is your understanding-
a) Jesus was not God with the God in the beginning.
b) Jesus was God who was with the God in the beginning.Thanks!
Also, you asked:
Do YOU believe Jesus when he said:“Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.”
Absolutely!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
