- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Trinitarian assertion:
Whatever is begotten of God is God.
Wasn't King David 'Begotten of God'?I just don't get it…
Why the use of 'Begotten' when it is simple enough to say, 'Created', or 'Born', appropriately.What is the difference in USAGE in 'Born' and 'Begotten'?
Don't anyone say they are the same?
Begotten, to me feels like 'obtained by', 'brought about by', 'taken up by', 'adopted by'.
The 'Be…' appears as 'already existing' and '…gotten' is as it feels. So 'one who is taken up from a preexisting position'.
Isaac was 'taken up from his previous position as 'second son of Abraham' to become 'first, and 'only' Son of Abraham' even though Ishmael still existed.
David was enthroned as [Earthly] Son of God from his position as 'a good and lowly shepherd'(Significant analogy…)
The runaway slave, Onesimus, was 'taken up' from his previous sinful position to become an honourable Christian believer by Saint Paul as an only Son following him stealing from his master.
I don't understand Jesus being 'Begotten' by God meaning he was 'Born' from God before the beginning of time. Why, then, not just say,'he was born/created by God…'.
Besides, when was it that the Father said to Jesus, 'You are my Son, Today I have Begotten you'?
Which 'Today' was there before days existed?
Can anyone help me to understand, please?
Quote (JustAskin @ May 30 2010,14:32) Hi All again, Can someone just explain to me, in simple terms, where a Son comes from, how one called 'Son' comes into being? Formed, Born, created, extruded, plucked from, etc.
God was alone, I understand, 'monogenes', is that right?
Then He 'Formed' another God from Himself. Is this right?
This 'other God', 'Jesus…to be named', He entitled 'Son', thereby becoming 'Father', and this was to be the pattern for man later on. Man creating Man, just as God created God. Is this right?
(Woman: Wom[bed] man: Womb[ed] man; Wombed Man. I can expand if anyone is interested) … I like this one: wo [to] man! If you are married you will know what I mean…
If there is a Father, then it stands to reason that there is a Son.
If there is a Son, stands to reason there must be a Father (Except for KJ who is fully investitured and therefore doesn't now have one!)
The above is agreed, nothing sinistered, no hidden trapdoors, magic tricks, etc.
Which came First, the Father, or the Son? Silly question, the Father, of course!
Nunce! The Son came From the Father! Simples, yeah!Ok, so I get it. First there was the Father, who 'formed' a Son from himself. Good, good, it's starting to come through…
So, this Son, formed from the Father, who is God, is therefore, also, God. Is this correct?
So we have 'God from God'
But, umm…, what I don't understand is, 'What is God?'.
The Trinity, defines God as 'Eternal'…but if the Father is 'God' and therefore 'Eternal', then how can the Son also be 'God'…'Eternal', because the Son came 'after' the Father.
I'm confused?
Oh, I also hear tell that God is ALL MIGHTY. So, the Father, who is God, is 'Almighty', then came the Son…'Almighty' too?
The Offshoot of the Almighty is also Almighty. Is this correct?But how can TWO seperate beings be BOTH Almighty
But yet we read in Scriptures that the Spirit of the Father, which is the Only (Monogenes) Holy Spirit is ALSO 'From/Of' the Father. Ok.
So, then to the Son. Here, although, God from God, we do not see a ' Holy Spirit of the Son'
Does this mean that the Son does not have a Spirit, or that the Spirit if the Son is not Holy?
And, I hear, 'God' created the universe and all within 'Through' his Son.
What, God? I thought it was agreed that the Son IS God?
God, who is the Father And the Son, created the universe through the Son, who was formed from the father and….
But wait – there's more…
The Trinity also goes on to say the God's Holy Spirit is ALSO 'God'
Now, let me try and understand this…
The Spirit, the actuating, motivating, enabling, …Life Force of God IS Itself a separate and independent being which is also 'God'.Well, ok, test this. The Spirit of the Son…must also be a separate and independent life force who is also 'God'.
So now we have, suddenly, not TWO Gods but FOUR…and it gets worse because next the angels are created and they are also called 'Sons of God', therefore, by Trinitarian definition, they, millions of them, are also 'God'…or Gods…
Could there be something wrong somewhere because all this is getting very messy!
The best I can make out is that Anything of a sentient nature is 'God', or, 'a God', or, 'IS, or contains, A Spirit', perhaps?
But there is only ONE initiator 'God' from whom ALL 'Spirits', 'gods' were formed, and that is the ONE and only, monogenes, True God, the One God called Father, perhaps?
First off, Monogenes…what does that sound like to you in english?Mono = One, or only
Genes = Biologically…seems like the stuff that's passed down your family….
So Monogenese almost sounds like = One and only family…just a thought. (O and the literal related family of a God is God in the same way the family of a man is another human)
——————————Anyways JustAskin's post should have ended this silly debate and thread….
JA, you hit the nail on the head for 90% of your analysis. But then veered off towards the end when you mocked your own words as if it were all too confusing or surreal.
But don't take it personal, we all draw conclusions… and when it comes to God…that's a bad and foolish mistake.
——————————————————–
You see, everything you said was exactly right and on point as far as understanding God's nature the best we can, biblically from the view points of a trinitarian AND anti-trinitarian.For a trinny, it explains how Jesus too can be God. And reconciles are worship of him…It also empowers the meaning of his death for us.
For an Anti-trinny like yourself it seems, it's confusing and needs to be rationalized.
——————————
Here's the good part….
Anti-T views explains how Jesus can be from God but not God but still gain all the glory of God…while keeping The Father numero uno….
And a trinny would find it confusing and in need of rationalization.
When in actuality…both points are two ends of the same road…therefore, it is truth all in all.
You're explaination was perfect…….
If only you said it with conviction instead mockery.
———————————————
I came from the trinitarian road, tried anti-trinitarian for a while…but ever since my brother's passing…..I've been fortunate to come to the truth.
———————————————–
God is all in all.
He is everything and in everything….Nothing can be defined without him.
Jesus is fully God, yet fully man.
Trinnies take the God side….
Anti-Trinnies take the Man side….When scripture points us to understanding BOTH.
You're explaination did a great job of bridging the Gap.
If Jesus was fully God, his death would of meant and did nothing.
If Jesus was fully Man, the same result….
If Jesus was both…his humbling of his Godship….
If Jesus was both…his enlightening of his manhood….Would be the perfect Gap to reconcile mankind to God…
His origins would also have be true in respect…
Forever existing as God…but coming into existence as a man.
Becoming a son and father, soon as God seperated himself and Begot another.
at the end of the day.
God is god, all in all.
Jesus and The holy spirit or identified as the ONLY two parts of God that were not created, but instead begotten or CAME from the actual source.
Hi All,
JA said:
Quote Begotten, to me feels like 'obtained by', 'brought about by', 'taken up by', 'adopted by'. What is this? First JA is trying to figure out begotten by deciding how it “feels” to him?
Then RM says:
Quote First off, Monogenes…what does that sound like to you in english? Mono = One, or only
Genes = Biologically…seems like the stuff that's passed down your family….
So Monogenese almost sounds like = One and only family…just a thought. (O and the literal related family of a God is God in the same way the family of a man is another human)
What's going on? You can't decide the definition of a Biblical word because it “feels” or “sounds” like this or that. Use a Greek lexicon or dictionary. I thought my opening post broke it down pretty clearly.
peace and love,
mikeRM,
I'm sorry, or rather Nart…the temptation to wallow in glory is not there.
My post WAS deliberately mocking.
You evidently don't know me.
I wasn't JUST ASKIN because I didn't know…you rightly detected the mock tone at the end.
My posts are often multilayered. Stick around, you may begin to see it.
By the way, that above was single layered.
I believe:
that the Father alone is God;
that Jesus had a beginning;
that he was divine in that as a Spirit creature he could not die;
that he was 'the Word' of God, the Father;
That he was one of the Chief, one of the Principle, Sons of God, the Father;
That he was perfect in his outlook and was the love of his Father;
That he was chosen by his Father as the greatest act of sacrificial Love for mankind, accepted with pleasure, the grand commission that would result in something that was incredible and horrifying to an immortal – Death!!;
That he emptied himself of his divinity and took on the mortal, fleshly body of man;
…Dot dot dot…
carried out his commission (to reveal the Father and to bring salvation to man through the death of himself, a completely sinless MAN, life to sinful man through death of a Sinless man) perfectly;
That he died, gave up his spirit and was in the grave for three days and nights, was raisd again by the Spirit of God, was begotten of God and taken up into heaven to sit at tne righthand of his Father and God, given all power and authority over all powers and authorities to reign over his father's kingdom untill they are subdued under him whence he hands all back to his Father and he becomes heir apparent for eternity as well as chief priest in the temple of his Father and God.(That, of course, is the Abridged version)Hi,
There is no trinity taught in scripture.Overwhelmingly Scripture teaches that the God of Jesus and Israel is the God we should serve.
Using logic rather than faith and selecting verses that support the catholic dogma of trinity is strangely the most popular path
Quote (JustAskin @ May 31 2010,04:38) Trinitarian assertion:
Whatever is begotten of God is God.
Wasn't King David 'Begotten of God'?I just don't get it…
Why the use of 'Begotten' when it is simple enough to say, 'Created', or 'Born', appropriately.What is the difference in USAGE in 'Born' and 'Begotten'?
Don't anyone say they are the same?
Begotten, to me feels like 'obtained by', 'brought about by', 'taken up by', 'adopted by'.
The 'Be…' appears as 'already existing' and '…gotten' is as it feels. So 'one who is taken up from a preexisting position'.
Isaac was 'taken up from his previous position as 'second son of Abraham' to become 'first, and 'only' Son of Abraham' even though Ishmael still existed.
David was enthroned as [Earthly] Son of God from his position as 'a good and lowly shepherd'(Significant analogy…)
The runaway slave, Onesimus, was 'taken up' from his previous sinful position to become an honourable Christian believer by Saint Paul as an only Son following him stealing from his master.
I don't understand Jesus being 'Begotten' by God meaning he was 'Born' from God before the beginning of time. Why, then, not just say,'he was born/created by God…'.
Besides, when was it that the Father said to Jesus, 'You are my Son, Today I have Begotten you'?
Which 'Today' was there before days existed?
Can anyone help me to understand, please?
I think it could be answered in this verse.John 1:3
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.In other words all things that were made were created by God and through Christ. So that would mean that Jesus wasn't made.
The second century apostles believed that Jesus (pre-human) was the first work of the Father and then the Father made all through him and for him. So that would make him unique and also a direct descendant of God and the first. The only begotten of God.
(The lines get a bit blurry though, when we talk about him being begotten through Mary. His father was God.)
Tatian (165 A.D) put it like this.
God was in the beginning, but the beginning, we have been taught, is the power of the Word. For the Lord of the universe, who is Himself the necessary basis of all being, inasmuch as no creature was yet in existence, was alone, but inasmuch as He was all powerful, Himself the necessary ground of things visible and invisible, with Him were all things; with Him, by Word-power, the Word himself also, who was in Him, subsists. And by His simple will the Word sprang forth, and the Word, not coming forth in vain, became the firstbegotten work of the Father . Him [the Word] we know to be the Beginning of the world (cf. Rev. 3:14). But He came into being by participation, not by cutting off, for what is cut off is separated from the original substance, but that which comes by participation, making its choice of function, does not render him deficient from whom it is taken. For just as from one torch many fires are lighted, but the light of the first torch is not lessened by the kindling of many torches, so the Word, coming forth from the Word-Power of the Father, has not divested of the Word-Power Him who begat Him.
Hi RM,
You said:
Quote Anyways JustAskin's post should have ended this silly debate and thread…. Are you aware what the thread is about? It's about whether or not monogenes meant begotten in the NT. How did JA's post say anything to settle that matter?
You said:
Quote Anti-T views explains how Jesus can be from God but not God but still gain all the glory of God…while keeping The Father numero uno…. And a trinny would find it confusing and in need of rationalization.
When in the Bible is Jesus said to have all the glory of God?
You said:
Quote I came from the trinitarian road, tried anti-trinitarian for a while…but ever since my brother's passing…..I've been fortunate to come to the truth. You talk about what Jesus says means EVERLASTING LIFE as if you were switching which sport team you root for.
You said:
Quote God is all in all. I know that is what will happen when the Son is subjected to the Father. Has that happened?
You said:
Quote He is everything and in everything….Nothing can be defined without him. I just had this conversation with SF. He agrees that God made the mountain, but God isn't the mountain. If God is everything, then you could worship Satan and still be worshipping God, right?
You said:
Quote If Jesus was fully God, his death would of meant and did nothing. If Jesus was fully Man, the same result….
Sounds like you describe someone who is not “fully man and fully God”, like you claim, but one who is “part man and part God”.
You said:
Quote His origins would also have be true in respect… Forever existing as God…but coming into existence as a man
Ah but he didn't forever exist as God, did he? He was begotten by his God before anything else was created. Otherwise, all things couldn't have come into existence through the Son of God. And God couldn't have SENT His only begotten Son into the world if he wasn't begotten until he got here.
You said:
Quote Becoming a son and father, soon as God seperated himself and Begot another. Come back when you want to intelligently discuss the meaning of monogenes, ginomai, genao, and prototokos pasa ktisis.
peace and love,
mikeCould someone just explain the difference between 'Born' and 'Begotten' and how and when each is used along with Scriptural verses (other than, 'of Jesus' where again i ask: Which 'Today' before days was he begotten?), please, please,
Responses are being Posted that don't answer the question. Is there a reasin for this?
Or else I will form my own view….and you wouldn't like me if I did that…!
Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 31 2010,09:33) Hi RM, You said:
Quote Anyways JustAskin's post should have ended this silly debate and thread…. Are you aware what the thread is about? It's about whether or not monogenes meant begotten in the NT. How did JA's post say anything to settle that matter?
You said:
Quote Anti-T views explains how Jesus can be from God but not God but still gain all the glory of God…while keeping The Father numero uno…. And a trinny would find it confusing and in need of rationalization.
When in the Bible is Jesus said to have all the glory of God?
You said:
Quote I came from the trinitarian road, tried anti-trinitarian for a while…but ever since my brother's passing…..I've been fortunate to come to the truth. You talk about what Jesus says means EVERLASTING LIFE as if you were switching which sport team you root for.
You said:
Quote God is all in all. I know that is what will happen when the Son is subjected to the Father. Has that happened?
You said:
Quote He is everything and in everything….Nothing can be defined without him. I just had this conversation with SF. He agrees that God made the mountain, but God isn't the mountain. If God is everything, then you could worship Satan and still be worshipping God, right?
You said:
Quote If Jesus was fully God, his death would of meant and did nothing. If Jesus was fully Man, the same result….
Sounds like you describe someone who is not “fully man and fully God”, like you claim, but one who is “part man and part God”.
You said:
Quote His origins would also have be true in respect… Forever existing as God…but coming into existence as a man
Ah but he didn't forever exist as God, did he? He was begotten by his God before anything else was created. Otherwise, all things couldn't have come into existence through the Son of God. And God couldn't have SENT His only begotten Son into the world if he wasn't begotten until he got here.
You said:
Quote Becoming a son and father, soon as God seperated himself and Begot another. Come back when you want to intelligently discuss the meaning of monogenes, ginomai, genao, and prototokos pasa ktisis.
peace and love,
mike
The point of MY post wasn't to establish the meaning of monogenes ect…Quote Are you aware what the thread is about? It's about whether or not monogenes meant begotten in the NT. How did JA's post say anything to settle that matter? This thread is here to debunk the trinitarian claims that Jesus pre-existed by explaining what the people of the time understood of the language being presented.
JA's post taken seriously should have enlightened you enough to understand the insignificance of the “monogenes” translation.
Quote When in the Bible is Jesus said to have all the glory of God? Well we know the Father says he will not share his glory with another.
Yet we pray, to Jesus? We ask him to forgive our sins? The people of his times wanted to stone him for claiming to be God and IN christianity, people believe and admonish him as “God” wether we are mistaken or not.
If God isn't sharing his glory with Jesus.
Then christianity is …..well basically…..Islam.
Well if God shares his glory with Jesus…then God himself is breaking his own word.
The only way for it to be true is if Jesus, is the same God he worships. (God transcends anything you can fathom. So he can transcend personages and play the role of The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost)
Quote You talk about what Jesus says means EVERLASTING LIFE as if you were switching which sport team you root for. Whatever helps you understand my position. If i'm right, who cares how I speak of it. The point is, in the midst of my confusion, i was able to find truth after my christian brother died in Dec. of last year.
And that truth
Is that the bible is a mystery.
You will never know it all.God will not condemn you for not getting it perfectly right.
The test isn't to score a 100%
It's just 70% or above.
So if we all lack in understanding, who cares…not one of us is perfectly right regardless how good, our truths make us feel.
Do you know…
If your feeble pathetic human mind, could even come to know God 100% entirely…that you would die?
If I tell a piece of paper
to become a gas…
It can happen…
I just got to set it on fire.
As soon as it's burned up, it'll be a gas, but will cease to be a piece of paper.The same would happen if you, who are so beneath God in everyway, could even begin to fathom or grasp his identity.
Jesus said ONLY the Son knows the Father. but we won't know it all until we die and cease to become human.
Btw,
you should be ashamed of yourself, treating a fellow christian with disrespect. We're not all on the same page, so if you're going to act like that towards someone who's trying to learn, you should stop while you're ahead.For someone who thinks they know it all, you seem to be acting as a perfect example for God.
I'm glad you're bible has taught you manners and I hope you are 100% correct in your conviction.
If you are, you have the weight gospel on your shoulders.
If you're not, God have mercy on your soul.
…The blind will lead the blind Jesus said.
If we aren't going to discuss and debate as a family in love, then we do it as dictators and robbers, through vain hatred.Some of you would rather be right, than to learn/hear the words of God.
Be open-minded and test, but don't bully or mistreat.
Hi RM,
Openmindedness does not extend to agreement with catholic speculations about God.
Paul spoke of such things in Rom 1Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 31 2010,13:22) Hi RM,
Openmindedness does not extend to agreement with catholic speculations about God.
Paul spoke of such things in Rom 1
Yes but even your resources for establishing what you believe to be true or false, can too be poisioned and tainted.So be open-minded to receive the truth…
Even if it crushes what you already believe.Quote (JustAskin @ May 31 2010,10:17) Could someone just explain the difference between 'Born' and 'Begotten' and how and when each is used along with Scriptural verses (other than, 'of Jesus' where again i ask: Which 'Today' before days was he begotten?), please, please, Responses are being Posted that don't answer the question. Is there a reasin for this?
Or else I will form my own view….and you wouldn't like me if I did that…!
Hi JA.I think this is a vaild question and worthy of its own topic. So I started up a topic here:
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;t=3249Hi RM,
The word of God is pure and the few changes can be identified by the Spirit Who wrote it through men.
Catholicism offers no stable foundation.Quote (RokkaMan @ May 31 2010,13:18) The point of MY post wasn't to establish the meaning of monogenes ect… Quote
Are you aware what the thread is about? It's about whether or not monogenes meant begotten in the NT. How did JA's post say anything to settle that matter?This thread is here to debunk the trinitarian claims that Jesus pre-existed by explaining what the people of the time understood of the language being presented.
JA's post taken seriously should have enlightened you enough to understand the insignificance of the “monogenes” translation.
Quote
When in the Bible is Jesus said to have all the glory of God?Well we know the Father says he will not share his glory with another.
Yet we pray, to Jesus? We ask him to forgive our sins? The people of his times wanted to stone him for claiming to be God and IN christianity, people believe and admonish him as “God” wether we are mistaken or not.
If God isn't sharing his glory with Jesus.
Then christianity is …..well basically…..Islam.
Well if God shares his glory with Jesus…then God himself is breaking his own word.
The only way for it to be true is if Jesus, is the same God he worships. (God transcends anything you can fathom. So he can transcend personages and play the role of The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost)
Quote
You talk about what Jesus says means EVERLASTING LIFE as if you were switching which sport team you root for.Whatever helps you understand my position. If i'm right, who cares how I speak of it. The point is, in the midst of my confusion, i was able to find truth after my christian brother died in Dec. of last year.
And that truth
Is that the bible is a mystery.
You will never know it all.God will not condemn you for not getting it perfectly right.
The test isn't to score a 100%
It's just 70% or above.
So if we all lack in understanding, who cares…not one of us is perfectly right regardless how good, our truths make us feel.
Do you know…
If your feeble pathetic human mind, could even come to know God 100% entirely…that you would die?
If I tell a piece of paper to become a gas…
It can happen…
I just got to set it on fire.
As soon as it's burned up, it'll be a gas, but will cease to be a piece of paper.The same would happen if you, who are so beneath God in everyway, could even begin to fathom or grasp his identity.
Jesus said ONLY the Son knows the Father. but we won't know it all until we die and cease to become human.
Btw,
you should be ashamed of yourself, treating a fellow christian with disrespect. We're not all on the same page, so if you're going to act like that towards someone who's trying to learn, you should stop while you're ahead.For someone who thinks they know it all, you seem to be acting as a perfect example for God.
I'm glad you're bible has taught you manners and I hope you are 100% correct in your conviction.
If you are, you have the weight gospel on your shoulders.
If you're not, God have mercy on your soul.
…The blind will lead the blind Jesus said.
If we aren't going to discuss and debate as a family in love, then we do it as dictators and robbers, through vain hatred.
Some of you would rather be right, than to learn/hear the words of God.
Be open-minded and test, but don't bully or mistreat.
Hi RM,You said:
Quote The point of MY post wasn't to establish the meaning of monogenes ect… Okay. But that is what this thread is about. Do you have an opinion about how Eusebius took it to mean Jesus was literally begotten, or “caused to exist” by the Father?
You said:
Quote This thread is here to debunk the trinitarian claims that Jesus pre-existed by explaining what the people of the time understood of the language being presented. Not just any ol' person of the time period, but “Eusebius, the greatest Greek teacher of the Church and most learned theologian of his time… “
You said:
Quote JA's post taken seriously should have enlightened you enough to understand the insignificance of the “monogenes” translation. That's what the trinitarians want you to believe – that it is a non-issue or “insignificant”. It is the actual proof that Jesus had a beginning. I don't think that is “insignificant”, do you?
I had asked: When in the Bible is Jesus said to have all the glory of God?
You said:
Quote Well we know the Father says he will not share his glory with another. Yes. So again, when does the Bible say He does?
You said:
Quote Yet we pray, to Jesus? No, YOU pray to Jesus. I pray to his God and my God, Jehovah. I do it THROUGH the name of God's Son, Jesus, as instructed by scripture.
You said:
Quote And that truth Is that the bible is a mystery.
You will never know it all.God will not condemn you for not getting it perfectly right.
The test isn't to score a 100%
It's just 70% or above.
So if we all lack in understanding, who cares…not one of us is perfectly right regardless how good, our truths make us feel.
While I agree no one could possibly score 100%, ignoring all the times that scripture tells us there is ONE God, and Jesus is THE SON of that ONE God, will undoubtedly score you way less than 70% IMO.
You said:
Quote Btw,
you should be ashamed of yourself, treating a fellow christian with disrespect. We're not all on the same page, so if you're going to act like that towards someone who's trying to learn, you should stop while you're ahead.For someone who thinks they know it all, you seem to be acting as a perfect example for God.
I'm glad you're bible has taught you manners and I hope you are 100% correct in your conviction.
If you are, you have the weight gospel on your shoulders.
If you're not, God have mercy on your soul.
…The blind will lead the blind
Jesus said.If we aren't going to discuss and debate as a family in love, then we do it as dictators and robbers, through vain hatred.
Some of you would rather be right, than to learn/hear the words of God.
Be open-minded and test, but don't bully or mistreat.
I deserved every bit of that. I'm sorry I spoke rudely to you. You gave me a wake up call, thanks.
peace and love,
mikeQuote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2010,12:51) Hi,
Knowing the God of Jesus and the Jews would clarify so much for those still stuck on theory.
Jesus said it himself…
Any glory given to the son is given to the father.Let me ask you, do you worship Jesus?
Mike,
It seems RM role is to go round telling everyone that they are rude. – Maybe the R in Rm is Rude – hey that's my name… that's rude of him!
RudeBwoy – say it fast and the accent will come … is a Jamaican term – naughty boy – Bad Man – depending on the person and the stress on the “B” – soft “boy”, Hard – man.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
