An honest inquiry into the nature of Christology by a Trinitarian

No one, hath seen, God, at any time: An Only Begotten God,
The One existing within the bosom of the Father, He, hath interpreted [him] (Jn. 1:18 ROT)

This is almost certainly the correct reading.
 
Johann said:
the only begotten Son; the word that was with God in the beginning. The Jerusalem Targum on Gen_3:22 says almost the same of the word of the Lord, as here, where it introduces him saying,
"the word of the Lord God said, lo, the man whom I created, the only one in my world, even as I am, יחידי, "the only one", (or, as the word is sometimes rendered, "the only begotten",) in the highest heavens.

And to the same purpose the Targum of Jonathan, and also Jarchi, on the same place. The Syriac version here renders it, "the only begotten, God which is in the bosom of the Father"; clearly showing, that he is the only begotten, as he is God: the phrase,
which is in the bosom of the Father, denotes unity of nature, and essence, in the Father and Son; their distinct personality; strong love, and affection between them; the Son's acquaintance with his Father's secrets; his being at that time, as the Son of God, in the bosom of his Father, when here on earth, as the son of man; and which qualified him to make the declaration of him:

Not going to be dogmatic brother.
Johann.
Click to expand...
From jewishishencyclopedia.com

As an intepretation of the Hebrew text of the Bible the Targum had its place both in the synagogal liturgy and in Biblical instruction, while the reading of the Bible text combined with the Targum in the presence of the congregation assembled for public worship was an ancient institution which dated from the time of the Second Temple, and was traced back to Ezra by Rab when he interpreted the word "meforash" (Neh. viii. 8) as referring to the Targum (Meg. 3a; Ned. 37b; comp. Yer. Meg. 74d, line 48, Gen. R. xxxvi., end). The rules for reading the Targum are formulated in the Halakah (see Meg. iii. and the Talmud ad loc.; Tosef., Meg. iv.). The Targum was to be read after every verse of the parashiyyot of the Pentateuch, and after every third verse of the lesson from the Prophets. Excepting the Scroll of Esther, which might be read by two persons in turn, only one person might read the Targum, as the Pentateuch or prophetic section also was read by a single person. Even a minor might read the Targum, although it was not fitting for him to do so when an adult had read the text. Certain portions of the Bible, although read, were not translated (as Gen. xxxv. 22), while others were neither read nor translated (as Num. vi. 24-26; II Sam. xi.-xiii.). The reader was forbidden to prompt the translator, lest any one should say that the Targum was included in the text of the Bible
 
DavidTree said:
From jewishishencyclopedia.com

As an intepretation of the Hebrew text of the Bible the Targum had its place both in the synagogal liturgy and in Biblical instruction, while the reading of the Bible text combined with the Targum in the presence of the congregation assembled for public worship was an ancient institution which dated from the time of the Second Temple, and was traced back to Ezra by Rab when he interpreted the word "meforash" (Neh. viii. 8) as referring to the Targum (Meg. 3a; Ned. 37b; comp. Yer. Meg. 74d, line 48, Gen. R. xxxvi., end). The rules for reading the Targum are formulated in the Halakah (see Meg. iii. and the Talmud ad loc.; Tosef., Meg. iv.). The Targum was to be read after every verse of the parashiyyot of the Pentateuch, and after every third verse of the lesson from the Prophets. Excepting the Scroll of Esther, which might be read by two persons in turn, only one person might read the Targum, as the Pentateuch or prophetic section also was read by a single person. Even a minor might read the Targum, although it was not fitting for him to do so when an adult had read the text. Certain portions of the Bible, although read, were not translated (as Gen. xxxv. 22), while others were neither read nor translated (as Num. vi. 24-26; II Sam. xi.-xiii.). The reader was forbidden to prompt the translator, lest any one should say that the Targum was included in the text of the Bible
Click to expand...
Thanks brother- jewishishencyclopedia.com is not a source I would use-unbeknownst to you I was quoting Gill-This is just me-according to the Greek and Hebrew text-that the Son was always existing in the bosom of the Father-I don't have to read what the Reformers are saying-just go to the Hebrew and Greek text-and pray we all may be illuminated by the Holy Spirit.

Θεὸν Theon|G2316|N-AMS|God οὐδεὶς oudeis|G3762|Adj-NMS|no one ἑώρακεν heōraken|G3708|V-RIA-3S|has seen πώποτε· pōpote|G4455|Adv|ever yet; μονογενὴς monogenēs|G3439|Adj-NMS|[the] only begotten Θεὸς Theos|G2316|N-NMS|God, b ὁ ho|G3588|Art-NMS|the [One] ὢν ōn|G1510|V-PPA-NMS|being εἰς eis|G1519|Prep|in τὸν ton|G3588|Art-AMS|the κόλπον kolpon|G2859|N-AMS|bosom τοῦ tou|G3588|Art-GMS|of the Πατρὸς, Patros|G3962|N-GMS|Father, ἐκεῖνος ekeinos|G1565|DPro-NMS|He ἐξηγήσατο. exēgēsato|G1834|V-AIM-3S|has made [Him] known.

Love this interpretation-

Joh 1:18 No one has ever seen Hashem [Ex 33:20]. It is Elohim the Ben Yachid [who shares the nature of Hashem, the Chochman Ben Elohim at his side, see very importantly Mishle 8:30; 30:4)], it is he, the one being in the kheyk (bosom) of HaAv, this one is Hashem's definitive midrash (exegesis).

Shalom Achi.
J.
 
Johann said:
Joh 1:18 No one has ever seen Hashem [Ex 33:20]. It is Elohim the Ben Yachid [who shares the nature of Hashem, the Chochman Ben Elohim at his side, see very importantly Mishle 8:30; 30:4)], it is he, the one being in the kheyk (bosom) of HaAv, this one is Hashem's definitive midrash (exegesis).
Click to expand...

Man that translation is so hard to understand you might as well just learn Hebrew.
 
DavidTree said:
What is a 'processional trinitarian' according to your estimation.
Click to expand...

processional
/prəˈsɛʃən(ə)l/
adjective
relating to or used in a religious or ceremonial procession.
"a processional cross"
noun
a book containing litanies and hymns for use in religious processions.
 
Begotten is one of those words we need to be careful of. It seems to me it can mean two different things and we must examine the context. Have a read at what International Bible Encyclopedia has to say about (monogenes): in Bible Hub


It is used literally of an only child: "the only son of his mother" (Luke 7:12); "an only daughter" (Luke 8:42); "mine only child" (Luke 9:38); "Isaac.... his only begotten" (Hebrews 11:17). In all other places in the New Testament it refers to Jesus Christ as "the only begotten Son of God" (John 1:14, 18; John 3:16, 18 1 John 4:9). In these passages, too, it might be translated as "the only son of God"; for the emphasis seems to be on His uniqueness, rather than on His sonship, though both ideas are certainly present. He is the son of God in a sense in which no others are. "Monogenes describes the absolutely unique relation of the Son to the Father in His divine nature; prototokos describes the relation of the Risen Christ in His glorified humanity to man" (Westcott on Hebrews 1:6). Christ's uniqueness as it appears in the above passages consists of two things: <---End of quote

So Christ was the only Son in the most unique eternal sense. So I'm wondering when we read in John's gospel of Jesus begotten it's meaning it in the ONLY sense as we see in the paragraph above.....but in Ps 2 and Heb where it speaks of This Day have I begotten you it's speaking in a different sense that is in something God now does. I believe Ps 2 and Acts 13:33 is referring to what God the Father did when he raised Jesus from the dead.

God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Acts 13:33

Also God does the same for us too when we're born again as we see in Jm 1:18, 1 Pt 1:3, 1 Pt 1:23, 1 Jn 2:29 It uses the word begotten about us. We will never be the ONLY eternal Son who was unique with him before creation. That' doesn't describe something God did but rather what he always was.

So it seems to me in the sense of something God does by an action it only took place once when Jesus was raised from the dead.
 
For Athanasius, Jesus could not be lesser than the Father in any way; Jesus had to be of the same substance and of the same eternity. Thus, the addition of the word, “eternally” to “begotten.” Yes, Jesus is the Son of God, but he has also always existed with (and as) God. He is as eternal as the Father.
 
Rockson said:
Begotten is one of those words we need to be careful of. It seems to me it can mean two different things and we must examine the context. Have a read at what International Bible Encyclopedia has to say about (monogenes): in Bible Hub


It is used literally of an only child: "the only son of his mother" (Luke 7:12); "an only daughter" (Luke 8:42); "mine only child" (Luke 9:38); "Isaac.... his only begotten" (Hebrews 11:17). In all other places in the New Testament it refers to Jesus Christ as "the only begotten Son of God" (John 1:14, 18; John 3:16, 18 1 John 4:9). In these passages, too, it might be translated as "the only son of God"; for the emphasis seems to be on His uniqueness, rather than on His sonship, though both ideas are certainly present. He is the son of God in a sense in which no others are. "Monogenes describes the absolutely unique relation of the Son to the Father in His divine nature; prototokos describes the relation of the Risen Christ in His glorified humanity to man" (Westcott on Hebrews 1:6). Christ's uniqueness as it appears in the above passages consists of two things: <---End of quote

So Christ was the only Son in the most unique eternal sense. So I'm wondering when we read in John's gospel of Jesus begotten it's meaning it in the ONLY sense as we see in the paragraph above.....but in Ps 2 and Heb where it speaks of This Day have I begotten you it's speaking in a different sense that is in something God now does. I believe Ps 2 and Acts 13:33 is referring to what God the Father did when he raised Jesus from the dead.

God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Acts 13:33

Also God does the same for us too when we're born again as we see in Jm 1:18, 1 Pt 1:3, 1 Pt 1:23, 1 Jn 2:29 It uses the word begotten about us. We will never be the ONLY eternal Son who was unique with him before creation. That' doesn't describe something God did but rather what he always was.

So it seems to me in the sense of something God does by an action it only took place once when Jesus was raised from the dead.
Click to expand...
Correct-we need to make a distinction as to Christ in His humanity and to what He is-not was-prior to His incarnation.
Love this post.
J.
 
The Son has no “ origin” He is eternal in the same way the Father and Holy Spirit are eternal without origin. This is where I part ways with some of the early church. They conflate anthrophomoric language and try and apply it to our Eternal God. Father/ Son is an eternal relationship. One is not before or from the other. That’s my beef.
 
civic said:
The Son has no “ origin” He is eternal in the same way the Father and Holy Spirit are eternal without origin. This is where I part ways with some of the early church. They conflate anthrophomoric language and try and apply it to our Eternal God. Father/ Son is an eternal relationship. One is not before or from the other. That’s my beef.
Click to expand...

Even if you go by the name "Word" preincarnate, a word still requires someone to speak it.
 
Johann said:
Thanks brother- jewishishencyclopedia.com is not a source I would use-unbeknownst to you I was quoting Gill-This is just me-according to the Greek and Hebrew text-that the Son was always existing in the bosom of the Father-I don't have to read what the Reformers are saying-just go to the Hebrew and Greek text-and pray we all may be illuminated by the Holy Spirit.

Θεὸν Theon|G2316|N-AMS|God οὐδεὶς oudeis|G3762|Adj-NMS|no one ἑώρακεν heōraken|G3708|V-RIA-3S|has seen πώποτε· pōpote|G4455|Adv|ever yet; μονογενὴς monogenēs|G3439|Adj-NMS|[the] only begotten Θεὸς Theos|G2316|N-NMS|God, b ὁ ho|G3588|Art-NMS|the [One] ὢν ōn|G1510|V-PPA-NMS|being εἰς eis|G1519|Prep|in τὸν ton|G3588|Art-AMS|the κόλπον kolpon|G2859|N-AMS|bosom τοῦ tou|G3588|Art-GMS|of the Πατρὸς, Patros|G3962|N-GMS|Father, ἐκεῖνος ekeinos|G1565|DPro-NMS|He ἐξηγήσατο. exēgēsato|G1834|V-AIM-3S|has made [Him] known.

Love this interpretation-

Joh 1:18 No one has ever seen Hashem [Ex 33:20]. It is Elohim the Ben Yachid [who shares the nature of Hashem, the Chochman Ben Elohim at his side, see very importantly Mishle 8:30; 30:4)], it is he, the one being in the kheyk (bosom) of HaAv, this one is Hashem's definitive midrash (exegesis).

Shalom Achi.
J.
Click to expand...
Thank You Brother

The apsect of Jewish thought is that they are acknowledging Torah and yet they do not have the entire Scriptures since they are only looking at (mostly) Torah and OT Prophets.

Furthermore, ELOHIM only desires us to know Them as FATHER SON HOLY SPIRIT = "Let Us make man in Our image according to Our likeness."

We are created in Their likeness via Washed in the New Covenant of Grace by His Blood + Born Again by the Spirit of God + Baptized in the Holy Spirit.

as you fully know - THEY are not created Beings
 
dizerner said:
Even if you go by the name "Word" preincarnate, a word still requires someone to speak it.
Click to expand...
The WORD Itself is Speaking
BUT
Not alone

Elohim, as you know is Plural, yet is always spoken as a singular because THEY are Echad/One

The human mind cannot comprhend this and therefore ELOHIM made it understandable for us thru FATHER SON HOLY SPIRIT.

Exodus ch3 = IAM that IAM = I will BE what I desire to BE

This is NOT modalism.

Modalism is the failed attempt by the human mind to understand FATHER SON HOLY SPIRIT
 

Similar threads

S
The misuse and abuse of John 17:3 by Unitarians to promote Unitarianism.
14 15 16
Replies
319
Views
3K
TomL
T
P
Knowing God through knowing nature
Replies
1
Views
32
praise_yeshua
P
T
Ignatius of Antioch’s Proclamation of the Essential Deity of Christ
Replies
0
Views
40
TomL
T
Johann
5 Non-Negotiables from the Church Fathers on the Incarnation
6 7 8
Replies
153
Views
1K
101G
101G
Pancho Frijoles
Jesus claimed exclusivity
4 5 6
Replies
111
Views
1K
JoshebB
JoshebB
Back
Top Bottom