civic
Active Member
One God who is 3, that’s the Trinity. Why would you misrepresent what he said ?
Member Comments on Current Debates
- Thread starter Administrator
- Start date
That's your choice, and maybe a wise one on your part. This is the reason:
As I said, my position which is basically in the middle of your view which flat out reject Jesus' Deity as the one true God, and those Christians who believe in the Eternal Sonship doctrine, which laid the foundation for your false teaching, by saying that Jesus is the eternal Son of God, which makes him "inferior" to God in his Divinity, which all know he is in his humanity, but not in his Divinity.
So, maybe we should set up a debate concerning the ~ Eternal Sonship vs. the Incarnate Sonship ~ where there are true Christians on both side of this debate, whereas, those who flat our reject Christ being equal to God cannot be called by that sacred name.... Christian.
The Incarnate Sonship believers are the only folks that can expose your false teaching for what it is. So, good choice for you, and @Peterlag to stop ~@Keiw1 is not to deep in the scripture, so she most likely will keep putting up her one liner, thinking she's doing God a service ~and @Studyman is in a league of his own, but is much closer to your side than the truth for sure.
Last edited:
@Runningman
Of course I am, according to the scriptures. God is a Spirit that inhabits eternity, always has, always will and as I have said so many times...this will "never" change.
He said in this very scripture he dwells with those who have a contrite spirit; and in the NT, the mystery of Christ is that HE dwells in in us, which make God and Christ ONE. Yet Christ is a person, God is a Spirit, so there you have more than ONE, in any way you look at at it, yet one in essence, etc. The three in one is revealed in the NT based on their work respectively in the redemption of God's elect. Nevertheless, if one truly ponders this very much, how can you truly separate God who is a Spirit from the Holy Ghost/Spirit? Only by the work respectively under the NT.
You said: "He's even a heretic by trinitarian standards."
You are correct in this assessment ~ yet, when one truly gives this some thoughts, they generally admit that they could be wrong, and of course they are, for most have embrace the eternal Sonship position without considering its ramifications, just as prompting the JW'S false teaching that Jesus is inferior to his Father, when in truth he is equal.
You said: God manifests himself as three different ways, but those three different manifestations are not God? He's a modalist.
I'm not a modalist ~ Since as I just explain above, God is a Spirit that dwells/lives in eternity, which no man can approach unto, or has ever seen, or, can see. Jesus Christ is his Son was born into this world and men have given a testimony that they seen, looked upon, their hands handled, of the Word of life!
hat which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.”
The Father remained in eternity, while his Son lived in this world, being the express image of whom God was was in human flesh, and by the very fact he was God only begotten Son (begotten in the manner in which he was begotten) made him equal with God, in any way you want to look at it. Call me whatever you desire to label me with, I'm strictly going by the scriptures and can defend my position with the word of God.
You said: "Red Baker is not a trinitarian"
Of course I am, according to the scriptures. God is a Spirit that inhabits eternity, always has, always will and as I have said so many times...this will "never" change.
John 4:24
“God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.”Isaiah 57:15
“For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.”He said in this very scripture he dwells with those who have a contrite spirit; and in the NT, the mystery of Christ is that HE dwells in in us, which make God and Christ ONE. Yet Christ is a person, God is a Spirit, so there you have more than ONE, in any way you look at at it, yet one in essence, etc. The three in one is revealed in the NT based on their work respectively in the redemption of God's elect. Nevertheless, if one truly ponders this very much, how can you truly separate God who is a Spirit from the Holy Ghost/Spirit? Only by the work respectively under the NT.
Colossians 1:26
“Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:”You said: "He's even a heretic by trinitarian standards."
You are correct in this assessment ~ yet, when one truly gives this some thoughts, they generally admit that they could be wrong, and of course they are, for most have embrace the eternal Sonship position without considering its ramifications, just as prompting the JW'S false teaching that Jesus is inferior to his Father, when in truth he is equal.
You said: God manifests himself as three different ways, but those three different manifestations are not God? He's a modalist.
I'm not a modalist ~ Since as I just explain above, God is a Spirit that dwells/lives in eternity, which no man can approach unto, or has ever seen, or, can see. Jesus Christ is his Son was born into this world and men have given a testimony that they seen, looked upon, their hands handled, of the Word of life!
1st John 1:1-3
“That 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; (For 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 hat which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.”The Father remained in eternity, while his Son lived in this world, being the express image of whom God was was in human flesh, and by the very fact he was God only begotten Son (begotten in the manner in which he was begotten) made him equal with God, in any way you want to look at it. Call me whatever you desire to label me with, I'm strictly going by the scriptures and can defend my position with the word of God.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
First of all... you say
eternal Son of God, which makes him "inferior" to God in his Divinity, which all know he is in his humanity, but not in his Divinity.
Are YOU now claiming that after His resurrection and His being with the Father in Heaven HE IS NO LONGER THE SON???
For if he is, that makes Him inferior to God... which is poppycock.
The concept of eternal sonship is supported by several biblical passages, including John 1:1-14, which describes the Word (identified as Jesus) as being with God and being God, and John 1:18, which refers to Jesus as the only begotten Son. Additionally, Hebrews 1:1-8 emphasizes the divine nature of the Son and His relationship with the Father, reinforcing the idea of His eternal sonship.
There is considerable biblical evidence to support the doctrine of the eternal Sonship of Christ. First, many passages clearly identify “the Son” as the one who created all things , thereby strongly implying that Christ was the Son of God at the time of creation. The most normal and natural meaning of such passages is that the second Person of the Godhead has always been the Son and, by extension, the Father has always been the Father and the Spirit has always been the Spirit
. see (Colossians 1:13–16; Hebrews 1:2)
Col KJV 1_from your bible of choice.
esp vs 15
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
the firstborn of every creature ... meaning born before creation, and ????? born before the angels who were created
and esp vs 16,
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
All things were created by Him.... meaning All of Gen 1 and 2 inclusive of His creating Adam.
Hebrews KJV 1:2
2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
So the worlds were made by His son.... means that He was His son before things were made.
So you cannot say that came about only 2000 plus years ago.. or you make a liar out of the King James bible.
We know that the Word was God in John 1:1 , and we know the Word became in the flesh in John 1:14 .
We know John said IN THE BEGUNNING was the Word. We were never told the beginning of what. Creation?
If The Worn became flesh, and was in the beginning and God's Son made the worlds... then this is proof the Son was the Wrod in the beginning.
We know that the Word was with the Father before time. Meaning the Don was with the Father before time.
AI says... Yes, the Bible states that the Word was with God before time began. Specifically, John 1:1-3 indicates that the Word existed in the beginning with God and was instrumental in the creation
John 17:5
Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.
I'm going to stop now because I do not have time to get into the OT references to God
It is you who reject the son not being equal. Not I.
You want a debate... Here is an idea....
The question, “What existed before creation?”
And and answer, " leads us to the most fundamental truth of the Bible: Before “In the beginning,” there was only God. The eternal, self-existent, triune God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—existed in perfect, loving communion, possessing infinite wisdom and an unchangeable plan for all things.
@FreeInChrist
No, you are not following alone carefully. I must run, be back mid afternoon to answer your full post.
@FreeInChrist
Or, better yet, just start a thread on this subject, since there are Christians on both side of this subject and some have never even considered the other side and all of its ramifications.
I was rushing my self ~meant to write along, not alone!
Save time and make it simple: Eternal Sonship vss Incarnate Sonship which is biblical? I'll be on the Incarnate Sonship side, and maybe @dwight92070 can be with me, since what I have read from some of his posit, he seems to be an incarnate believer, even if he does not call himself that.
Or, better yet, just start a thread on this subject, since there are Christians on both side of this subject and some have never even considered the other side and all of its ramifications.
Last edited:
FreeInChrist
Active Member
Ill take it under advisement and let you know.
Or better yet.....
Anyone reading this in any way interested in either side of this?
I would also be on the Jesus always being God side. Pre existent as the Son. Son as in 'image ' 'expression ' rather than 'born out of'. But this may be a bit too technical of a debate. I can try though.
@360watt
I was first taught the eternal Sonship position, but soon found that it has some serious hole in its position. Many good men that I have high regard for taught the eternal Sonship position. But, we can not follow man, but the scriptures.
I do not know all that Michael Servetus believe in his strong disagreement with John Calvin, that cost him his life. but it was over this very issue, to what degree we shall never know since Servetus' works were burned with him. But histroy tell us his last words were these:
AI Overview
Michael Servetus's last words, uttered as he was being burned at the stake in 1553, were, "Jesus, Son of the Eternal God, have mercy on me". These words are considered a reflection of his anti-Trinitarian views, as he emphasized Jesus' identity as the "Son of the Eternal God" rather than "eternal Son of God".
Brother, the good thing is this: there are believers on both side, one just not yet educated on the Sonship doctrine.
I was first taught the eternal Sonship position, but soon found that it has some serious hole in its position. Many good men that I have high regard for taught the eternal Sonship position. But, we can not follow man, but the scriptures.
I do not know all that Michael Servetus believe in his strong disagreement with John Calvin, that cost him his life. but it was over this very issue, to what degree we shall never know since Servetus' works were burned with him. But histroy tell us his last words were these:
AI Overview
Michael Servetus's last words, uttered as he was being burned at the stake in 1553, were, "Jesus, Son of the Eternal God, have mercy on me". These words are considered a reflection of his anti-Trinitarian views, as he emphasized Jesus' identity as the "Son of the Eternal God" rather than "eternal Son of God".
Last edited:
One more thought.
John Calvin did not have Servetus burned, because of his understanding, the men of Geneva did. Calvin labored to get him to changed his understanding but refused to do so. Michael Servetus went to Geneva to confront Calvin, which was not wise on his part. I have read some things where Calvin and him disagree but only from Calvin's writings, so, who knows, I would have love to hear exactly what Michael Servetus did truly believe, but his confession sounded very good, so who knows.
John Calvin did not have Servetus burned, because of his understanding, the men of Geneva did. Calvin labored to get him to changed his understanding but refused to do so. Michael Servetus went to Geneva to confront Calvin, which was not wise on his part. I have read some things where Calvin and him disagree but only from Calvin's writings, so, who knows, I would have love to hear exactly what Michael Servetus did truly believe, but his confession sounded very good, so who knows.
Eternally-Grateful
Active Member
I would be curious to understand how someone who does not believe in the eternal essence of the son, can trust in the cross for salvation. and be satisfied with this.
If Jesus is mere man. How could he pay for all of our sin?
@Eternally-Grateful
The Eternal Sonship is a dogma that is discredited logically by self contradiction. To contend that Jesus was eternally begotten is a manifest contradiction of term. We ask: can an object begin and not begun? No. The saying within itself is most absurd. Why do not people consider this, and understand it? Acts 28:25-27 is the answer.
Please consider carefully: Eternity is that which has no beginning, nor stands in reference to time~Son supposes time, generation, and father; time is also antedent to such generation~therefore, the conjunction of the two terms: Son and eternity~is absolutely impossible as they imply different and opposite ideal. Words must have meaning, or else, how can we communicate with each other on a level where we can understand each other? I understand eternity and I also understand the word son, and so do my readers, and we should know how to use each word properly, without confusing the meaning of either.
You said: "How someone who does not believe in the eternal essence of the son, can trust in the cross for salvation. and be satisfied with this. If Jesus is mere man. How could he pay for all of our sin?"
By the very fact God was his Father, being the very express image of who God is, more than qualify him to be the very person for God to laid help upon to secure the salvation of his elect.
The Eternal Sonship is a dogma that is discredited logically by self contradiction. To contend that Jesus was eternally begotten is a manifest contradiction of term. We ask: can an object begin and not begun? No. The saying within itself is most absurd. Why do not people consider this, and understand it? Acts 28:25-27 is the answer.
Please consider carefully: Eternity is that which has no beginning, nor stands in reference to time~Son supposes time, generation, and father; time is also antedent to such generation~therefore, the conjunction of the two terms: Son and eternity~is absolutely impossible as they imply different and opposite ideal. Words must have meaning, or else, how can we communicate with each other on a level where we can understand each other? I understand eternity and I also understand the word son, and so do my readers, and we should know how to use each word properly, without confusing the meaning of either.
You said: "How someone who does not believe in the eternal essence of the son, can trust in the cross for salvation. and be satisfied with this. If Jesus is mere man. How could he pay for all of our sin?"
By the very fact God was his Father, being the very express image of who God is, more than qualify him to be the very person for God to laid help upon to secure the salvation of his elect.
Eternally-Grateful
Active Member
Begotten is his humanity..,
I ask again
How can you trust a God who punishes a mere man for your salvation. And not the eternal God
Scripture said it is through Jesus all things were created.
It calls him God
Jesus said before abraham came into existence. he always existed (he is eternal)
I mean I do not get it.
Peterlag
Active Member
There is no Scripture that says Jesus is a mere man. Jesus is the son of God, the Messiah to Israel, and the now resurrected Lord Christ to the Christian who sits at the right hand of God as second in command and is the head of the Church that is called the body of Christ.
@Eternally-Grateful
Later, I have meeting. I have explained this at length a few times over, but will be happy to do so again Late this afternoon ~ EST.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
You say your beliefs are grounded in the bible....
I will repeat from before
Col 1: 15
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.
Col 1:16
For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities— all things have been created through Him and for Him.
Irrefutable proof that Jesus was before creation. Before any creation, even of the angels as Col 1:15 reads
Now... let us move on tyo what it says elsewhere in the Holy Scriptures and why.
In eternity past
Matthew 11:27: “All these things have been given to me by my Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father and anyone to whom the Son of Man decides to reveal him.”
The bottom line is that the Greek present tense is timeless and supports the notion that the Father and Son knew each other intimately for eternity, in the past, present and future—forever. Jesus did not become the Son at his birth or baptism
check out ~ (Matthew: Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament [Zondervan, 2010], p. 440).
Back to John ever so briefly:
John 1: 1-2 states that God and the Word existed before creation:
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
This verse further clarifies the identity of God and the Word ~ they ARE Father and Son, who came from the Father in heaven
John 1:14 states ~ And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
then
John 17:5 states ~ “Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.
Right here, for no one to miss... Jesus is saying with the glory which I had with You before the world was.
Jesus is stating to the Father they were together before the world was.
If this is not convincing you yet.... answer this
So how does Jesus have the status of being the Word, and how does God have the status of being God before the world existed but do not have the status of the Father and Son before creation?
How do you understand John 5:26? “For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself;
Do you see this gift cannot be temporary because the Father also has life in himself eternally. Therefore the Son also has life in himself eternally–just as the Father has this.
How about John 17:24? “Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.
Can you not understand this is the Son talking to his Father about when they were before the foundation of the world.
John 1:18 says: No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
First note the further proof of Jesus being God here. Plus Jesus more fully reveals their status and nature of Father and Son...beyond God and Word. Therefore the Father was in heaven with his Son before the incarnation and birth.
John 8:38. “I speak the things which I have seen with My Father; therefore you also do the things which you heard from your father.” The point is they were in close relationship as we have seen in John 1:1-2, 14 and 17:5. This relationship in the Father’s presence happened before the incarnation. To be the Father, he had to have at least one son in his presence. That Son is Jesus.
Last edited:
FreeInChrist
Active Member
I would welcome you, but at the same time I will ask @civic or @Administrator if they can mopve this from where Red said he wanted a debate into its own thread... not necessarily a debate opne but could be.... so comments from that debate dont
bump into these.
I already answered one to Red... so basically in my mind it is on... no matter where.
So come on in, the water is fine
You can setup whatever you like and it's fine with me. Let me know if you need any help.
No man named God--Only a delusional one claims to have done so.
And they used Catholicism translating= error filled. And the removal of Gods name= an atrocity against Gods will to support satans will.Hey @Keiw1
Have a moment to kill so checking into things.
The translators of the King James Version (KJV) were primarily ordained Church of England priests, representing a range of Protestant beliefs, including both Anglican and Puritan perspectives. This diverse group worked together despite their differing religious backgrounds to create a universally accepted Bible.
Religious Affiliations of the KJV Translators
The translators of the King James Bible (KJV) were primarily affiliated with the Church of England. Here’s a breakdown of their religious backgrounds:
Main Religious Group
Church of England Most translators were ordained priests in the Church of England.
[th]
Group
[/th][th]
Description
[/th]
Other Affiliations
- Puritans: Some translators had Puritan backgrounds, which influenced their perspectives on the translation.
- Diverse Backgrounds: While the majority were from the Church of England, the group included scholars from various religious factions, reflecting the religious tensions of the time.
Notable Points
This diverse representation helped to ease some of the religious conflicts during King James I's reign.
- The translators were chosen to represent a range of views to promote unity among differing religious factions.
- Their collaborative effort aimed to create a version of the Bible that would be accepted across the religious spectrum in England.
Similar threads
