you do not know that theos is a generic term. that is your weakness in vocabulary. I have pointed out errors with your ideas on Greek grammar. Now i Have to inform on the definition of words.
Eternal Generation of the Son (Aseity)
- Thread starter Ladodgers6
- Start date
Runningman
Active Member
Ahh, I can work with your admission that theos is a generic term, sometimes applied to other humans all over the Bible, not meant to confuse others who are not God Almighty with being the same as God Almighty. So you understand that if theos is applied to Jesus then you still have not created a good argument for the deity of Jesus anymore than if you were saying Moses is God.
Now that you admit that, did you know most of the same miracles Jesus did and the titles he has, other humans have too? It's because Jesus is our example. It's true Jesus is unique in many ways, but not in the way you're saying.
haha. you really like to take Psa 82: 6 not as sort of a statement (rather than identifying them as gods) and use that to say all men are gods. The passage also was quoted by Jesus as a rebuke but you turn it into a universal statement. The trivial point overtakes your logic.
Runningman
Active Member
It's more than just "you are gods" but also "you are all sons of the Most High." That's a double whammy. Now they are all gods, they are all sons of the Most High, just like Jesus. That was enough to bend them over a barrel, but really it just ticked them off. Jesus also refutes your accusations. Someone who is the son of God is not themselves God. I am starting to think that a good thread should be Untangling Trinitarian logic.
What I mean by Divine Essence/Autotheos & all his attributes of Divine Simplicity. So, when I write Essence it includes everything pertaining to God in & of himself (Immanent Trinity).
What do we mean by this (Immanent Trinity)? To begin with, let's distinguish between (Immanent Trinity) and the (Economy Trinity). The Immanent Trinity refers to who out Triune God is in eternity, apart from the created order. Sometimes the Immanent Trinity is called the Ontological Trinity. Remember, ontology refers to the study of being, in this case God's being, that is, His essence and nature. To refer to the Immanent Trinity, then, is to refer to who the Triune God is (Internally/Intrinsically), according to himself and in and of himself, apart from creation. The (Economic Trinity), however, refers to how this Triune God acts towards the created order. Economic describes the Triune God's external operations in creation, providence, and redemption. Perhaps some Latin can help: when we refer to the Trinity in eternity (Immanent Trinity), apart from the created order, we can refer to the (Opera Ad Intra); internal/intrinsic operations of the Trinity. But when we refer to how the Trinity acts towards his creation (Economic Trinity), we can refer to the (Opera Ad Extra); the external operations of the Trinity.
What do we mean by this (Immanent Trinity)? To begin with, let's distinguish between (Immanent Trinity) and the (Economy Trinity). The Immanent Trinity refers to who out Triune God is in eternity, apart from the created order. Sometimes the Immanent Trinity is called the Ontological Trinity. Remember, ontology refers to the study of being, in this case God's being, that is, His essence and nature. To refer to the Immanent Trinity, then, is to refer to who the Triune God is (Internally/Intrinsically), according to himself and in and of himself, apart from creation. The (Economic Trinity), however, refers to how this Triune God acts towards the created order. Economic describes the Triune God's external operations in creation, providence, and redemption. Perhaps some Latin can help: when we refer to the Trinity in eternity (Immanent Trinity), apart from the created order, we can refer to the (Opera Ad Intra); internal/intrinsic operations of the Trinity. But when we refer to how the Trinity acts towards his creation (Economic Trinity), we can refer to the (Opera Ad Extra); the external operations of the Trinity.
Again I ask where in Scripture does it state anything about Jesus not being God; Aseity? So, you are suggesting that Christ never was prior to his incarnation? Thanks, for clarifying your position. If Jesus is not YHWH, nor deity or god. Why is he worshipped? Why does Jesus command the eleven to go make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit?
Thank you for being up Jesus' baptism. You think he was a real sinner needing a baptism. Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist to "fulfill all righteousness" (Matthew 3:15), signifying his obedience to God, identifying with sinful humanity despite being sinless, and initiating his public ministry. It marked the start of his mission to redeem humanity and symbolized his future death and resurrection. Pay attention and notice all the persons of the Trinity appear to together here! The Father, Son and Holy Spirit to begin to consummate the Redemptive Plan to redeem and reconcile sinners to God.
Jesus is not God? To clarify here, the persons of the Trinity have distinct properties; The Father is unbegotten, the Son is begotten, the Holy Spirit is spiraled from the Father & Son. But the 3 persons are irreducible Triune in essence. One God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
I do not want to caricature your position. So, I'll ask you this, are you saying that Jesus created when he was incarnated and never exist prior to that event?
Thank you for being up Jesus' baptism. You think he was a real sinner needing a baptism. Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist to "fulfill all righteousness" (Matthew 3:15), signifying his obedience to God, identifying with sinful humanity despite being sinless, and initiating his public ministry. It marked the start of his mission to redeem humanity and symbolized his future death and resurrection. Pay attention and notice all the persons of the Trinity appear to together here! The Father, Son and Holy Spirit to begin to consummate the Redemptive Plan to redeem and reconcile sinners to God.
Jesus is not God? To clarify here, the persons of the Trinity have distinct properties; The Father is unbegotten, the Son is begotten, the Holy Spirit is spiraled from the Father & Son. But the 3 persons are irreducible Triune in essence. One God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
I do not want to caricature your position. So, I'll ask you this, are you saying that Jesus created when he was incarnated and never exist prior to that event?
Why not??? Christ is begotten from the Father, coming forth from the Father essence, not having a different essence separate essence. Why? because then you will have 2 gods not 1.
Consider the opening of John's Gospel, for example. I often hear pastors advising churchgoers to give the Gospel of John to someone they are trying to evangelize. That's for good reason, too: John's Gospel lays out the gospel with lucid conviction, bringing the unbeliever face-to-face with the crucified and risen Christ and the many gifts he gives to all recipients of His Grace. That's why we love texts like John 3:16; we desire to tell the world about God's Son so that they might receive eternal life.
But in our rush to talk about eternal life, we sometimes skip to the second half of John 3:16 and forget to talk about the Eternal Son. As the first half of John 3:16 says, God...gave...his...only begotten...Son. When we rush to the benefits the Son brings and skip over the identity the Son has in Eternity.
Did you know, for instance, that John begins his Gospel not with the eternal life we receive but with the life the Triune God enjoys in eternity? "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God" (1:1-2).
Before we get to the good news about Jesus and the eternal life he brings, let's take a step back and consider, as John does, where this Jesus originates from in the first place. This will be hard, but let's put off what God has done in creation and focus first on who God is apart from creation. Why would we do that? Here's why: unless you understand who God is apart from you, you will never understand the importance of what God has done for you, at least not in full. I realize how counterintuitive that sounds, holding off history of redemption---your history---to talk about things eternal. Abstract and esoteric perhaps. But John is convinced that in doing so you will have a better grasp of who this Word is and why He became flesh and dwelt among us. Furthermore, a long line of church fathers also believe that John's approach avoids a dirty swamp of heresies, many of which threaten to conflate who God is in and of himself (ad intra) with how God acts externally (ad extra) towards his creation.
Notice what John does first: he begins in the beginning. But what John means by the beginning is probably not what you think. He echoes the language of creation from Genesis to talk about the Eternal God who made creation, and who this God must be before any rose bush and palm tree came into existence. Before all ages, there was God and nothing else. Before the cosmos existed, there was God and him alone. Except alone may sound as is he was lonely. He was not. For in the beginning, says John, was the Word---John's way of referring to the Son, Co-Eternal, this Word was with God. Co-Eternal, this Word was God. It's hard to more closely identify the Word with God than this. He was coequal with God as the one who was God himself.
John's choice of language ---Word---is strategic. For soon enough he will tell his readers that this Word is none other than the Son of God himself. A word is worded by it's speaker, meaning there is a source. Likewise with the word: as the Word of God, he comes from God from all eternity to reveal God to those in history. John will spell this out in more detail when he switches his imagery from Word to Son (1:14). As Son, he is from the Father, for that is what it means to be a son after all. Yet since this is God we are talking about, the Son is eternally generated from the Father's nature before all ages. Never was there a time when the Father was without his Word, because never was there a time when the Father did not beget his Word. If there were, then in no way could John say the Word (the Son) was both with God, and was God. In John's mind the Word (the Son) is both distinct from God (the Word was with God) and one with God himself (the essence) is only possible because of eternal generation:the Son is distinct precisely because he is begotten by the Father; the Son is coequal precisely because he is begotten from the Father's nature, the same divine nature the Son shares.
Having establish the Word's eternal relation of origin in verses 1-2, John is now ready to introduce the world. It is because the Word is eternal (never was there a time when the Word was not with God) and it is because the Word's origin is divine (never was there a time when the Word was not with God) that "all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made" (1:3). Through the Word, God created the cosmos ex nihilo. To clarify, it's not the Word who is created out of nothing; the world is created out of nothing by the Word. The Word is not created along with creation, nor is the Word created prior to the rest of creation. Rather, the creation is brought into existence through the Word whose existence never began, whose divinity never had a starting point.
But it's not creation that is attributed to the Word; salvation is as well. No work of God is kept from the Son. Transitioning metaphors, John calls the Word the "life"and the "light" (1:4-5), the "true light" that gives life to the world (1:9). He can do that since the "world was made through him" (1:10). But here's something more remarkable still: in order to give life to the world, the Word became incarnate (flesh). "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth" (1:14).
Extraordinary! The Eternal Word, the Son of God himself, the Alpha & Omega, the one who is begotten from the Father from all eternity, was sent by the Father to ensure we would be recipients of his Grace. On the one hand, says John, "No man has seen God at any time" (1:18), an observation the OT itself reiterates (Deut. 4:15). On the other hand, "the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him (1:18). How appropriate, then, for John to call the Eternal Son the Eternal Word. It is because he is the only begotten Son from the Father, begotten before all ages as the Word who was with God and was God, that he can then, at the proper time, become incarnate and reveal the Father to us for our salvation. He is the revelation of God in the flesh.
From John 1 forward, John and Jesus will both move back and forth from eternity to history, from God himself to God toward us, always demonstrating that the latter is contingent on the former. But never, never conflating the two. As Jesus claims repeatedly to be the way to salvation in John's Gospel, he will also back up his right to make claim, especially when the religious leaders question his authority, by appealing to his eternal origin from the Father. It is only because he is begotten by the Father from all eternity that he can then claim to be sent by the Father to become incarnate in history. His eternal relation to the Father constitutes his redemptive mission to the world, but never vice versa. Get that order right, and we see the gospel in proper trinitarian perspective; get that order wrong, and we misuse the gospel to redefine the Trinity in Eternity.
Consider the opening of John's Gospel, for example. I often hear pastors advising churchgoers to give the Gospel of John to someone they are trying to evangelize. That's for good reason, too: John's Gospel lays out the gospel with lucid conviction, bringing the unbeliever face-to-face with the crucified and risen Christ and the many gifts he gives to all recipients of His Grace. That's why we love texts like John 3:16; we desire to tell the world about God's Son so that they might receive eternal life.
But in our rush to talk about eternal life, we sometimes skip to the second half of John 3:16 and forget to talk about the Eternal Son. As the first half of John 3:16 says, God...gave...his...only begotten...Son. When we rush to the benefits the Son brings and skip over the identity the Son has in Eternity.
Did you know, for instance, that John begins his Gospel not with the eternal life we receive but with the life the Triune God enjoys in eternity? "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God" (1:1-2).
Before we get to the good news about Jesus and the eternal life he brings, let's take a step back and consider, as John does, where this Jesus originates from in the first place. This will be hard, but let's put off what God has done in creation and focus first on who God is apart from creation. Why would we do that? Here's why: unless you understand who God is apart from you, you will never understand the importance of what God has done for you, at least not in full. I realize how counterintuitive that sounds, holding off history of redemption---your history---to talk about things eternal. Abstract and esoteric perhaps. But John is convinced that in doing so you will have a better grasp of who this Word is and why He became flesh and dwelt among us. Furthermore, a long line of church fathers also believe that John's approach avoids a dirty swamp of heresies, many of which threaten to conflate who God is in and of himself (ad intra) with how God acts externally (ad extra) towards his creation.
Notice what John does first: he begins in the beginning. But what John means by the beginning is probably not what you think. He echoes the language of creation from Genesis to talk about the Eternal God who made creation, and who this God must be before any rose bush and palm tree came into existence. Before all ages, there was God and nothing else. Before the cosmos existed, there was God and him alone. Except alone may sound as is he was lonely. He was not. For in the beginning, says John, was the Word---John's way of referring to the Son, Co-Eternal, this Word was with God. Co-Eternal, this Word was God. It's hard to more closely identify the Word with God than this. He was coequal with God as the one who was God himself.
John's choice of language ---Word---is strategic. For soon enough he will tell his readers that this Word is none other than the Son of God himself. A word is worded by it's speaker, meaning there is a source. Likewise with the word: as the Word of God, he comes from God from all eternity to reveal God to those in history. John will spell this out in more detail when he switches his imagery from Word to Son (1:14). As Son, he is from the Father, for that is what it means to be a son after all. Yet since this is God we are talking about, the Son is eternally generated from the Father's nature before all ages. Never was there a time when the Father was without his Word, because never was there a time when the Father did not beget his Word. If there were, then in no way could John say the Word (the Son) was both with God, and was God. In John's mind the Word (the Son) is both distinct from God (the Word was with God) and one with God himself (the essence) is only possible because of eternal generation:the Son is distinct precisely because he is begotten by the Father; the Son is coequal precisely because he is begotten from the Father's nature, the same divine nature the Son shares.
Having establish the Word's eternal relation of origin in verses 1-2, John is now ready to introduce the world. It is because the Word is eternal (never was there a time when the Word was not with God) and it is because the Word's origin is divine (never was there a time when the Word was not with God) that "all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made" (1:3). Through the Word, God created the cosmos ex nihilo. To clarify, it's not the Word who is created out of nothing; the world is created out of nothing by the Word. The Word is not created along with creation, nor is the Word created prior to the rest of creation. Rather, the creation is brought into existence through the Word whose existence never began, whose divinity never had a starting point.
But it's not creation that is attributed to the Word; salvation is as well. No work of God is kept from the Son. Transitioning metaphors, John calls the Word the "life"and the "light" (1:4-5), the "true light" that gives life to the world (1:9). He can do that since the "world was made through him" (1:10). But here's something more remarkable still: in order to give life to the world, the Word became incarnate (flesh). "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth" (1:14).
Extraordinary! The Eternal Word, the Son of God himself, the Alpha & Omega, the one who is begotten from the Father from all eternity, was sent by the Father to ensure we would be recipients of his Grace. On the one hand, says John, "No man has seen God at any time" (1:18), an observation the OT itself reiterates (Deut. 4:15). On the other hand, "the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him (1:18). How appropriate, then, for John to call the Eternal Son the Eternal Word. It is because he is the only begotten Son from the Father, begotten before all ages as the Word who was with God and was God, that he can then, at the proper time, become incarnate and reveal the Father to us for our salvation. He is the revelation of God in the flesh.
From John 1 forward, John and Jesus will both move back and forth from eternity to history, from God himself to God toward us, always demonstrating that the latter is contingent on the former. But never, never conflating the two. As Jesus claims repeatedly to be the way to salvation in John's Gospel, he will also back up his right to make claim, especially when the religious leaders question his authority, by appealing to his eternal origin from the Father. It is only because he is begotten by the Father from all eternity that he can then claim to be sent by the Father to become incarnate in history. His eternal relation to the Father constitutes his redemptive mission to the world, but never vice versa. Get that order right, and we see the gospel in proper trinitarian perspective; get that order wrong, and we misuse the gospel to redefine the Trinity in Eternity.
you desire then to be rebuked. and now you are splitting the psalm into total confusion.you missed where this was not a defining of who they are but something said to them. They obviously were rebuked and were not actually gods. You live in the world of the rebuked. You even are left reconciling (in your application) whether they are gods or sons of the Most High at all. It is not one or the other. You cannot tell a rebuke of an obscure group from a statement of doctrine or truth. Please clean up your interpretation skills before posting this stuff.
Similar threads
