- This topic has 713 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
@t8
An eternal prototype cannot become replicated into something with the same essence because the significant ‘eternalness’ within the prototype’s essence would be completely impossible to replicate. An eternal prototype can however begat another of the same eternal essence if the one begotten was also eternal and had the exact essence of the other…and was always within the one who begat before he himself was begotten. That would be a Father/Son relationship…two in number, one in essence. One unbegotten, the other begotten. The terms “unbegotten” and “begotten” merely reflect position, not essence.
With the two cell analogy…if eternal nature was paramount for the first cell to be the first cell, then the other cell within it would also have to have the eternal nature in order to be an identical cell in essence to the first. Therefore the first cell always had the second cell within it before begetting it.
Hebrews 1:3
The Son is the radiance of his glory and the exact representation of his essence, and he sustains all things by his powerful word, and so when he had accomplished cleansing for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.
What you describe as the Son is NOT the EXACT representation of the Father’s eternal essence but indeed much different than the Father’s eternal essence. That goes against Hebrews 1:3.
The first I am talking about is the first spirit to be with God. God is not first in the sense that he is eternal or infinite, so he is greater than first, second, third, and everything else. But someone had to be first with God right? Jesus is that first born. He was with God in the beginning. The first born son. The Word. The prototype that all other sons come from.
The first One to be with God was the exact same type as God. Therefore, the first One to be with God could not be a prototype. A son, btw is not a type of essence, it is a type of relationship. When a son is an only begotten son, then he is not only the first son but also the last son. All others designated as “son” are sons in another sense.
Once again:
Hebrews 1:3
The Son is the radiance of his glory and the exact representation of his essence, and he sustains all things by his powerful word, and so when he had accomplished cleansing for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.
You are correct that he has to be like God if he came from God. He has divine nature for sure, and we both agree that he emptied himself and came in the flesh and lived as a human.
I will address your other points soon. Got some errands to run.
@t8
Hello t8,
As I have said before, more than once, I want to tell you, again, how much I appreciate this message board that you have designed and how much my involvement here has caused me seek God’s understanding on His written Word…as I dig into it, meditate on it, and then communicate what I am beginning to understanding the scriptures to say, especially the relationship between the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit.
We differ on whether or not the Son has always existed with the Father. You believe that the Son has not always existed with the Father and I believe that the Father has never been without His Son.
You ask a logical and popular question when you ask “how can a son be the same age as his own father?” I believe that I can give you an actual physical example of how that can be. Please keep in mind that this is just a limited physical example of something created and the actual spiritual experience of the divine cannot be truly known by our futile minds…so here goes:
Think of the very first cell to ever asexually reproduce in all of creation. There had to be a time when this happened, don’t you agree?
Within that very first cell, all of the contents of that very first cell, through the reproduction process, became two cells…one within the other. The outer cell contained everything it needed to function as a distinct cell. The inner cell also contained everything it needed to function as a distinct cell of exactly the same type. The only difference is not the age of the contents within each cell, the difference is…one cell is inside the other and will be begotten from the other at some point. The outer cell is considered the cell that begets, or the parent cell, the inner cell is considered the cell that is begotten, or the offspring cell.
That shows how one thing becomes father and son and how the son is as old as the father in terms of the existence of Their essence.
If people say that there was a time when the Son was not begotten, I agree. That seems to be what the scriptures are implying when we read in scripture that the adjective “begotten” is applied to the Son, in fact the only begotten Son, see John 3:16. The Nicene Creed mentions the same understanding when it says that the only begotten Son was “begotten before the ages, begotten, not made.”
If people say that there was a time when the Son was NOT (in regards to His essence), I disagree. A begetting is not a beginning of existence. In human terms, a begetting happens to something that already exists. Like a woman begets a child after the child has existed for almost nine months. We can see that in all creatures. The offspring needs to already exist before it can be born/begotten.
I believe that the only way the same honor can be given to the Son as to the Father as we are commanded to do, and for the Son to be the exact representation of the Father as Hebrews 1 tells us, is if there was never a time when the essence of the Son did not exist. I also see more than one “person” being called “YHWH” and that would explain why. They both have always essentially existed, which the name “YHWH” implies.
So, there you have it, t8…a word picture of how a son can have essentially existed as long as his father.
God has always existed but was God always Father AND Son or just potential Father and Son? Whatever the answer, the essence of the Father and the Son has always existed. God is Father and Son. The title “father” requires the co-existence of an offspring of the same type. God could never have been just the “Father” as I understand it.
Here is a picture to help see how the parent cell has the same essence as the offspring cell and how they are the same type of cell in function yet two distinct cells.
The word son is enough to convey the meaning of sonship and the meaning of Father is enough to convey that meaning.
The fact that I am a son and a father is by design of God and God would not confuse us. He clearly shows us through our own family relationships the relationship he has with the son. We know immediately and from scripture that Jesus is the firstborn son, the prototype. Scripture is quite clear about this. We do not need to wander into strange mystical doctrines about God and his son.
As for essense, yes God has divine nature and Jesus who is of God shares that nature. But we too share that nature and we know by this that while we are the image of God, we are not God. The same applies to Jesus. He calls us brethren meaning we are sons too. Except he is the prototype son and that is unique. The son gets lost in most doctrines because they say he is God or Man. But the truth is he is between God and Man. He has the nature of God and he partook of the nature of man. He is special, unique, and he is the only way we see the invisible God in full glory.
Hi Lightenup and T8 sorry for interrupting but I thought this will help the both of you.
The sad and shocking fact is that the whole world of Christianity, as we know it today, denies that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of His Father God. All Christian denominations say that they believe Jesus Christ is God’s only begotten Son, but in reality, what they say and mean and what the Bible clearly says and means are two absolutely different things.
The history of Christianity shows that a number of heretical belief systems of false Christianity have appeared since the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, as expressly warned by Christ Himself (Matthew 24:4-5), and also, by Christ’s disciples (1 John 4:1-6) and Apostle Paul (2 Corinthians 11:13-15). These heretical false belief systems are listed below:
Trinitarianism: the belief in one God, yet confusingly and illogically maintaining that this one God is in effect three co-equal Gods of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Arianism: the belief in one God, but insisting that Jesus Christ is a created being and hence denying the divinity of the Son of God.
Unitarianism: the belief in one God but, like Arianism, it also denies the divinity of the Son as God’s only begotten Son.
Binitarianism: the belief in one God, yet confusingly and illogically maintaining that this one God is in effect two co-equal Gods of Father and Son.
Modalism: the belief in one God existing in three consecutive, but not simultaneous, modes of Father, Son and Holy Spirit; which like Trinitarianism is also confusing and illogical, denying many clear scriptures of the Bible.
Ditheism: the belief in two co-equal Gods which is, of course, polytheism. However, some adherents believe that one of the gods later decided to be born as the Son of God through his human virgin birth. God bless
Christ is the only begotten son of God means he was begotten or conceived of the spirit of God in his spirit mind as distinguished from being conceived supernaturally of the genes of David in the womb of his mother Mary as the son of man with his human mind and body.
@Anthony @Truthcomber
You are free to post in one of the many other places but this thread is a closed thread. If you want to get a message to me regarding anything in this thread, please pm me and I will be happy to respond to you.
God bless,
LU
Hi t8,
you said:
The word son is enough to convey the meaning of sonship and the meaning of Father is enough to convey that meaning.
Do you believe that you are a son of God in the same way that Jesus is a son of God?
Yes I do as I believe all who are born of God are the sons of God.
Of course, as far as being a son, I was not the firstborn son as Jesus Christ is.
Further, I believe he was born son of God, emptied himself, came in the flesh, died for our sins, and is back in the glory he had with God before the cosmos. I cannot claim any such thing. The prototype son is the reason I can be a son. Further, he is so much greater than me and all the sons. He is the bridegroom and all of us the bride.
t8,
Do you believe that you went from not being a son of God to later becoming a son of God? In other words, was there ever a time when you were not yet a son of God?
Correct. Jesus was never NOT a son of God. That is another difference.
Although he was divine, he partook in our nature so we could partake in his nature. Now he is back in the glory he had with God before the cosmos and we can not only be like him, but with him.
As you know, you have been asked to answer this post of mine addressed to you since Jan. 9th or thereabout. I am putting it here in hopes that you will make it a priority, thanks. Here it is:
The Father identifies the Son as YHVH, see here:
Hebrews 1:10-12
O Lord (the Son),
You (the Son) laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of Your hands (the Son’s hands).
11They will perish, but You (the Son) remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12You (the Son) will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed;
but You (the Son) remain the same,
and Your years (the Son’ years) will never end.”
This OT passage gives further witness to that here:
Compare with Psalm 102
24I say, “O my God (the Son), do not take me away in the midst of my days,
Your years (the Son’ years) are throughout all generations.25“Of old You (the Son) founded the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands (the Son’ hands).26“Even they will perish, but You (the Son) endure;
And all of them will wear out like a garment;
Like clothing You (the Son) will change them and they will be changed.27“But You (the Son) are the same,
And Your years (the Son’s years) will not come to an end.The words in parenthesis are added by myself for clarification.
PC, who is the Father identifying as the YHVH who founded the earth and the heavens are the work of His hands if you claim that the Son is not YHVH?
Blessings, LU
Note these words in that chapter.
And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says,
So God is speaking,
He speaks about angels.
In speaking of the angels he says,
He then talks about the Son
But about the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy.”First thing to note (because it is easy), is that according to this, the Son has a God.
therefore God, your God,
But you of course seem to hinge your view on this:
“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;”
Greek grammar here allows for a different translation. Even Trinitarian scholars admit that “God is your throne (or Your throne is God) is also grammatically correct (see Robertson or Westcott for example). Some of these scholars also concede that it makes theological sense. The RSV translates Psalm 45:6 as “Your divine throne endures forever and ever.” The NRSV footnote for Psalm 45:6 reads, “Your throne is a throne of God” and the Hebrews 1:8 footnote reads, “God is your throne.”
Viewing this verse the way you does open up a problem. It means that God has a God and God’s God anoints God so that God’s God would make God to be above God’s peers.
Lightenup, sorry I know I have asked this before.
What was the verse you wanted me to look at.
Was it this one?
Are you ok?
The post that I want addressed is on this page dated March 29, 2021 at 5:10 pm #869994.
It is really unlike you to ask so many times to remind you what passage that I have been waiting for you to address. I am sincere in my concern. I hope you are ok.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
