Eternally-Grateful
Active Member
lol
You still have not answered my question.
There is God.
then their are created beings
(Angels)
(Humans)
which one is jesus
Open Debate on the "Eternal Sonship vs Incarnate Sonship which is biblical?"
- Thread starter FreeInChrist
- Start date
You still have not answered my question.
There is God.
then their are created beings
(Angels)
(Humans)
which one is jesus
Peterlag
Active Member
I don't need to stall since I know all. I did not answer because the question is not understood. For example: When you say Jesus do you mean the one that walked the earth or the one now in his resurrected body?
@civic
I know that he changed, since the Incarnate Sonship lost him a lot of friends. I'm not judging him, but, his Calvinism and mine understanding are not even close. That being said, I believe he loved God, his word and did good in his life, yet God knows all of us, perfectly . He's finished his course, and died a very wealthy man ~ I will leave it there. There's no good talking about a dead man.
@FreeInChrist
Martin Luther King did say one things among others that I fully agree with: "What folks say about me does not bother me, what my friends say, does indeed bother me"............, or something to those words, maybe not word for word........... I'm no supporter of MLK Jr. yet he was a very intelligent and gifted speaker.
I read every post in the thread I'm in, regardless who is posting. Not sure why would say that.
Martin Luther King did say one things among others that I fully agree with: "What folks say about me does not bother me, what my friends say, does indeed bother me"............, or something to those words, maybe not word for word........... I'm no supporter of MLK Jr. yet he was a very intelligent and gifted speaker.
Runningman
Active Member
You seem to show awareness that Jesus was created. Good on you.
civic
Active Member
No trin denies as a man he was created.
You seem to show no awareness of His pre existence as God. Bad on you
Rowan
Active Member
Luke 1:35: “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God.”
Bishop Pearson, one of the most strenuous defenders of “eternal generation,” and of all the peculiarities of the Nicene doctrine of the Trinity, gives four reasons why the Theanthropos or Godman is called the Son of God. (1.) His miraculous conception. (2.) The high office to which he was designated. (John 10:34, 35, 36.) (3.) His resurrection, according to one interpretation of Acts 13:33. “The grave,” he says, “is as the womb of the earth; Christ, who is raised from thence, is as it were begotten to another life, and God, who raised him, is his Father.” (4.) Because after his resurrection He was made the heir of all things. (Heb. 1:2–5.) Having assigned these reasons why the Godman is called Son, he goes on to show why the Logos is called Son.
There is nothing, therefore, in the passages cited inconsistent with the Church doctrine of the eternal Sonship of our Lord. The language of the angel addressed to the Virgin Mary, may, however, mean no more than this, namely, that the assumption of humanity by the eternal Son of God was the reason why He should be recognized as a divine person. It was no ordinary child who was to be born of Mary, but one who was, in the language of the prophets, to be the Wonderful, the Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Son of the Highest. It was because the Eternal Son was made of a woman, that that Holy Thing born of the virgin was to be called the Son of God.
It need hardly be remarked that no valid objection to the doctrine of the eternal Sonship of Christ, or, that He is Son as to his divine nature, can be drawn from such passages as speak of the Son as being less than the Father, or subject to Him, or even ignorant. If Christ can be called the Lord of glory, or God, when his death is spoken of, He may be called Son, when other limitations are ascribed to Him. As He is both God and man, everything that is true either of his humanity or of his divinity, may be predicated of Him as a person; and his person may be denominated from one nature, when the predicate belongs to the other nature. He is called the Son of Man when He is said to be omnipresent; and He is called God when He is said to have purchased the Church with his blood.
The Relation of the Spirit to the other Persons of the Trinity
As the councils of Nice and Constantinople were fully justified by Scripture in teaching the eternal Sonship of Christ, so what they taught of the relation of the Spirit to the Father and the Son, has an adequate Scriptural foundation.
That relation is expressed by the word procession, with regard to which the common Church doctrine is, (1.) That it is incomprehensible, and therefore inexplicable. (2.) That it is eternal. (3.) That it is equally from the Father and the Son. At least such is the doctrine of the Latin and all other Western churches. (4.) That this procession concerns the personality and operations of the Spirit, and not his essence.
The Scriptural grounds for expressing this relation by the term procession, are (1.) The signification of the word spirit. It means breath, that which proceeds from, and which gives expression and effect to our thoughts. Since Father and Son, as applied to the First and Second persons of the Trinity, are relative terms, it is to be assumed that the word Spirit as the designation of the Third Person, is also relative. (2.) This is further indicated by the use of the genitive case in the expressions πνεῦμα τοῦ πατρός, τοῦ υἱοῦ, which is explained by the use of the preposition ἑκ, as πνεῦμα ἑκ τοῦ πατρός. The revealed fact is that the Spirit is of the Father, and the Church in calling the relation, thus indicated, a procession, does not attempt to explain it. (3.) In John 15:26, where the Spirit is promised by Christ, He is said to proceed from the Father.
That the Latin and Protestant churches, in opposition to the Greek Church, are authorized in teaching that the Spirit proceeds not from the Father only, but from the Father and the Son, is evident, because whatever is said in Scripture of the relation of the Spirit to the Father, is also said of his relation to the Son. He is said to be the “Spirit of the Father,” and “Spirit of the Son;” He is given or sent by the Son as well as by the Father; the Son is said to operate through the Spirit. The Spirit is no more said to send or to operate through the Son, than to send or operate through the Father. The relation, so far as revealed, is the same in the one case as in the other.
When we consider the incomprehensible nature of the Godhead, the mysterious character of the doctrine of the Trinity, the exceeding complexity and difficulty of the problem which the Church had to solve in presenting the doctrine that there are three persons and one God, in such a manner as to meet the requirements of Scripture and the convictions of believers, and yet avoid all contradiction, we can hardly fail to refer the Church creeds on this subject, which have for ages secured assent and consent, not to inspiration, strictly speaking, but to the special guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology
Bishop Pearson, one of the most strenuous defenders of “eternal generation,” and of all the peculiarities of the Nicene doctrine of the Trinity, gives four reasons why the Theanthropos or Godman is called the Son of God. (1.) His miraculous conception. (2.) The high office to which he was designated. (John 10:34, 35, 36.) (3.) His resurrection, according to one interpretation of Acts 13:33. “The grave,” he says, “is as the womb of the earth; Christ, who is raised from thence, is as it were begotten to another life, and God, who raised him, is his Father.” (4.) Because after his resurrection He was made the heir of all things. (Heb. 1:2–5.) Having assigned these reasons why the Godman is called Son, he goes on to show why the Logos is called Son.
There is nothing, therefore, in the passages cited inconsistent with the Church doctrine of the eternal Sonship of our Lord. The language of the angel addressed to the Virgin Mary, may, however, mean no more than this, namely, that the assumption of humanity by the eternal Son of God was the reason why He should be recognized as a divine person. It was no ordinary child who was to be born of Mary, but one who was, in the language of the prophets, to be the Wonderful, the Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Son of the Highest. It was because the Eternal Son was made of a woman, that that Holy Thing born of the virgin was to be called the Son of God.
It need hardly be remarked that no valid objection to the doctrine of the eternal Sonship of Christ, or, that He is Son as to his divine nature, can be drawn from such passages as speak of the Son as being less than the Father, or subject to Him, or even ignorant. If Christ can be called the Lord of glory, or God, when his death is spoken of, He may be called Son, when other limitations are ascribed to Him. As He is both God and man, everything that is true either of his humanity or of his divinity, may be predicated of Him as a person; and his person may be denominated from one nature, when the predicate belongs to the other nature. He is called the Son of Man when He is said to be omnipresent; and He is called God when He is said to have purchased the Church with his blood.
The Relation of the Spirit to the other Persons of the Trinity
As the councils of Nice and Constantinople were fully justified by Scripture in teaching the eternal Sonship of Christ, so what they taught of the relation of the Spirit to the Father and the Son, has an adequate Scriptural foundation.
That relation is expressed by the word procession, with regard to which the common Church doctrine is, (1.) That it is incomprehensible, and therefore inexplicable. (2.) That it is eternal. (3.) That it is equally from the Father and the Son. At least such is the doctrine of the Latin and all other Western churches. (4.) That this procession concerns the personality and operations of the Spirit, and not his essence.
The Scriptural grounds for expressing this relation by the term procession, are (1.) The signification of the word spirit. It means breath, that which proceeds from, and which gives expression and effect to our thoughts. Since Father and Son, as applied to the First and Second persons of the Trinity, are relative terms, it is to be assumed that the word Spirit as the designation of the Third Person, is also relative. (2.) This is further indicated by the use of the genitive case in the expressions πνεῦμα τοῦ πατρός, τοῦ υἱοῦ, which is explained by the use of the preposition ἑκ, as πνεῦμα ἑκ τοῦ πατρός. The revealed fact is that the Spirit is of the Father, and the Church in calling the relation, thus indicated, a procession, does not attempt to explain it. (3.) In John 15:26, where the Spirit is promised by Christ, He is said to proceed from the Father.
That the Latin and Protestant churches, in opposition to the Greek Church, are authorized in teaching that the Spirit proceeds not from the Father only, but from the Father and the Son, is evident, because whatever is said in Scripture of the relation of the Spirit to the Father, is also said of his relation to the Son. He is said to be the “Spirit of the Father,” and “Spirit of the Son;” He is given or sent by the Son as well as by the Father; the Son is said to operate through the Spirit. The Spirit is no more said to send or to operate through the Son, than to send or operate through the Father. The relation, so far as revealed, is the same in the one case as in the other.
When we consider the incomprehensible nature of the Godhead, the mysterious character of the doctrine of the Trinity, the exceeding complexity and difficulty of the problem which the Church had to solve in presenting the doctrine that there are three persons and one God, in such a manner as to meet the requirements of Scripture and the convictions of believers, and yet avoid all contradiction, we can hardly fail to refer the Church creeds on this subject, which have for ages secured assent and consent, not to inspiration, strictly speaking, but to the special guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology
Runningman
Active Member
Please show me where Jesus is saying or doing anything in the Old Testament then.
Rowan
Active Member
Colossians 1:16-20
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:17. And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
19. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
20. And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.
civic
Active Member
Everywhere God appears in the OT with the prophets beginning in the garden with Adam where God walked and talked with him.
Remember Jesus says no man has seen the Father or heard His voice.
Richard
Active Member
Jesus shows up often in the Old Testament—not by that name, and not in the same form as we see Him in the New Testament, but He is there nonetheless. The theme of the entire Bible is Christ.
Jesus Himself confirmed the fact that He is in the Old Testament. In John 5:46 He explained to some religious leaders who had challenged Him that the Old Testament was talking about Him: “If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.” According to Jesus, God’s work with man since time began all pointed to Him. Another time when Jesus showed that He is in the Old Testament was on the day of His resurrection. Jesus was walking with two of His disciples, and “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (Luke 24:27). Earlier, before His crucifixion, Jesus had pointed to Isaiah 53:12 and said, “It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’ and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment” (Luke 22:37).
By some counts, more than 300 Old Testament prophecies point to Jesus Christ and were fulfilled by Him in His life on earth. These include prophecies about His unique birth (Isaiah 7:14), His earthly ministry (Isaiah 61:1), and even the way He would die (Psalm 22). Jesus shocked the religious establishment when He stood up in the synagogue of Nazareth and read from Isaiah 61, concluding with this commentary: “This scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing today” (Luke 4:18–21).
Another way that Jesus is in the Old Testament is in the form of Christophanies—pre-incarnate appearances of the Son of God. The Old Testament uses the term angel of the Lord interchangeably with the Lord in reference to these visitations. One Christophany is found in Genesis 18:1–33 when the Lord appeared to Abram in human form. Such tangible encounters with deity are scattered throughout the Old Testament (Genesis 16:7–14; 22:11–18; Judges 5:23; 2 Kings 19:35; Daniel 3:25).
But there are even deeper ways that Jesus is found in the Old Testament. These are seen in what we call “types.” A type is a person or thing in the Old Testament that foreshadows a person or thing in the New. For example, the tabernacle, the sacrificial system, and the Passover are all types of Christ’s redemption. In addition, some of the lives of Old Testament characters reflect elements of the life of Christ. Moses, like Jesus, spoke for God, confronted the evil powers of the day, and led his people to freedom through a miraculous deliverance. The life of Joseph is another that seems to model the life of Christ.
Many Old Testament historical events double as symbols of what God would do in the future, through Christ. For example, God called Abraham to offer his son Isaac as a sacrifice. Abraham uttered these prophetic words in response to Isaac’s question about a lamb: “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son” (Genesis 22:8). God did provide a ram in Isaac’s place, symbolizing what He would do thousands of years later on that very mountain when His own Son was offered as a sacrifice in our place (Matthew 27:33). Events surrounding the sacrifice of Isaac thus serve as a type of the sacrifice of Christ.
Jesus referred to another event in Israel’s history as a foreshadowing of His crucifixion. In the wilderness, the people following Moses had sinned, and God sent serpents among them to bite them. The people were dying, and they appealed to Moses for help. God told Moses to make a bronze serpent and place it on a pole. All those who looked to it would be healed (Numbers 21:4–19). Jesus alluded to this incident in John 3:14–15: “Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life in him.”
God’s design for the tabernacle is another way that Jesus is in the Old Testament. The altar in the courtyard symbolizes the need for Jesus’ sacrifice to atone for our sin. The laver shows Jesus as providing the water of life (John 4:14). Inside the Holy Place, the lampstand is suggestive of Jesus as the light of the world (John 9:5). The table of showbread is Jesus as the bread of life (John 6:35). In the altar of incense is seen Jesus as our heavenly intercessor, continually offering prayers for us (Romans 8:34; Hebrews 7:25). According to Hebrews 10:20, the veil before the ark of the covenant is a picture of Jesus’ human flesh.
The Son of God is not just in the New Testament; Jesus is in the Old Testament, too. Jesus is God’s promised Messiah. From the virgin birth in Bethlehem (Isaiah 7:14; Luke 1:35; Micah 5:2), through the sojourn to Egypt (Hosea 11:1; Matthew 2:14–15), to His ministry of healing and hope (Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:8), all the way through His resurrection (Psalm 16:9–11; Acts 2:31), Jesus Christ is the theme of both Old and New Testaments. It could be said that Jesus is the reason for the Bible. He is the Living Word. The entire Bible is a beacon that points us to God’s offer of reconciliation, the hope of forgiveness and eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Got?
@Runningman
Paul did not say the Rock was Jesus, for that's his fleshy name, that identifies God's Son with his humanity born of a woman, born "in time". The scriptures of truth, (Daniel 10:21)..... speaks of his Deity as God, which has no beginning and has no end, eternal both ways. The scriptures very wisely and carefully protect Jesus' Deity as the God of Genesis 1:1 and so must we. The Eternal Sonship destroys Jesus' Deity as God, no one can escape this fact.
As God, which he was, being the Word from the beginning ~ 1st John 1:1-2, he created all things! One gentleman has already provided you with proof from Colossians, proof you continually reject.
1st Corinthians 10:3
“And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.”Paul did not say the Rock was Jesus, for that's his fleshy name, that identifies God's Son with his humanity born of a woman, born "in time". The scriptures of truth, (Daniel 10:21)..... speaks of his Deity as God, which has no beginning and has no end, eternal both ways. The scriptures very wisely and carefully protect Jesus' Deity as the God of Genesis 1:1 and so must we. The Eternal Sonship destroys Jesus' Deity as God, no one can escape this fact.
Will anyone address post 52, 64, 72, 78, 79, 122, and 123?
Last edited:
FreeInChrist
Active Member
There is a difference between if someone reads something or actually listens to what is said.
Good morning Red. I hope this finds you feeling better and that your cold if not gone is much improved.
This was not directed at me, but I will take a stab at question #1 in post 52.
The answer to the question, "Can true Divinity be deprived or propagated?", must, it seems to me, be no. But then it also seems to me that answer must defeat your position. That means that the man Jesus, the Son of God, could not be divine since He was not self-existent, infinite or eternal. If He was not divine, then He must be just a very good person. If He was not divine, then He could not be the perfect sacrifice needed to save the world which He said was the purpose of His being (John 12:47). You might answer that it was "the Word" that was divine. But the Word did not die on the cross; the Word which was divine cannot and did not die. It was the not-divine man Jesus who died on the cross.
As I noted elsewhere, I believe that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are simply designations, epithets, identifiers to the three beings of the Trinity. They are just names applied to the three divine beings that are God.
Runningman
Active Member
So there is nothing about Jesus pre-existing under any identifiable name in the Old Testament. Ok got it. Looks like he isn't God then. My God is eternal, Jesus isn't eternal. Do the math. Don't blame me, I didn't write the Bible.
Runningman
Active Member
Which verse shows where Jesus is in the OT?
Eternally-Grateful
Active Member
And here we go
take your pride and go elsewhere
God resists the proud and gives grace to the humble
since you have admitted you know it all (proud) I will do as God does. and resist.
You have nothing to offer me my friend.. You claim I did not answer. yet I did.
But since you know it all.. It does not matter what I say, you will never hear.
Good day sir
Eternally-Grateful
Active Member
Eternally-Grateful
Active Member
He did have a name in the Old Testament. He gave it to Moses at the burning bush
