The Eternal Son

[civic]

Isa 9:6For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.


Doug

its time to get the popcorn popper going

 

[DavidTree]

That’s not in John 1:1.

Nice try

YES it is

You are just digging in your heels
AND
It is human reasoning to suggest such nonsense which is the foundation of jws, unitarians, cessationists, modalists, and amillinielists, catholics and such religions that rely on man-made teachings.

Elohim only needs to make a single declaration about Themselves and that declaration is Truth.
Elohim declared that THEY are Eternal.
This means in every place in Scripture, without the need to declare it over and over, THEY are Eternal and it is irrevocable.

Example #1 - Genesis 1:26 - "Let Us make man in Our image according to Our likeness"

From chapter 1 of 'The Beginning' , we are immediately told that Elohim is Plural and THEY are THREE

Elohim reveals His Truth for us thru the Scriptures, building upon each Truth to it's MAIN Purpose = CHRIST/Salvation

Example #2 - Genesis 3:15 - "The seed of the woman will crush your(satan) head"

Example #3 - Genesis - Abraham/Isaac/Jacob

@TibiasDad

 

[DavidTree]

Isa 9:6For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.


Doug

AWESOME

 

[DavidTree]

Was there ever a time that the Word did not know that he was the Son of God?


Doug

How far back does eternity go...........do you know?

When in eternity past did Elohim become "FATHER/SON/HOLY SPIRIT" = do you know? does scripture tell us?

JESUS said God is a Spirit = do you believe Him?

If God is a Spirit, how did HE beget a Son in eternity past?

Proverbs 30:5-6
Every word of God is flawless;
He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him.
Do not add to His words,
lest He rebuke you and prove you a liar.

 

[civic]

YES it is

You are just digging in your heels
AND
It is human reasoning to suggest such nonsense which is the foundation of jws, unitarians, cessationists, modalists, and amillinielists, catholics and such religions that rely on man-made teachings.

Elohim only needs to make a single declaration about Themselves and that declaration is Truth.
Elohim declared that THEY are Eternal.
This means in every place in Scripture, without the need to declare it over and over, THEY are Eternal and it is irrevocable.

Example #1 - Genesis 1:26 - "Let Us make man in Our image according to Our likeness"

From chapter 1 of 'The Beginning' , we are immediately told that Elohim is Plural and THEY are THREE

Elohim reveals His Truth for us thru the Scriptures, building upon each Truth to it's MAIN Purpose = CHRIST/Salvation

Example #2 - Genesis 3:15 - "The seed of the woman will crush your(satan) head"

Example #3 - Genesis - Abraham/Isaac/Jacob

@TibiasDad

Nope here are the facts .

The Word is just as eternal as the Son and vice versa.

You cannot have one without the other.

 

[DavidTree]

Nope here are the facts .

The Word is just as eternal as the Son and vice versa.

You cannot have one without the other.

#1 - Well, of course the Son is eternal = why would you think otherwise!!!

#2 - You certainly can have the Eternal Elohim Word without being the Son in eternity past
Why would you think otherwise!!!

#3 - The facts are that which Elohim has declared - and nothing more and nothing less.
Why would you think otherwise!!!

 

[DavidTree]

@civic and @TibiasDad

Let us, we who are Brethren thru the Precious Blood of Christ, really sit back and think now only on Scripture.

The fulfillment of Prophecy is when the Word that was Elohim became flesh and declared at that MOMENT in TIME as the only begotten of the FATHER.

Can we declare that HE was the only begotten of the Father before His Incarnation?

Let us sit back and run our hearts and minds thru the Holy Scriptures with prayer, patience and hearing.

@civic , if i am proven wrong thru a accurate/factual declaration by Elohim as being the SON from Eternity = i WIN

i WIN because my joy is to know the TRUTH and nothing but the TRUTH = so HELP me my ABBA

and you WIN because we both grow more in love with His Word

 

[Runningman]

Isa 9:6For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.


Doug

"He will be called..." is future tense so a declaration about what he "will be called" is not the same thing as calling him that. After that, no one even called him that in the Bible. So I ask again. Please quote the verse where the son is ever explicitly called eternal anywhere in the Bible.

 

[TibiasDad]

How far back does eternity go...........do you know?

As far backwards as eternity future goes forward!

When in eternity past did Elohim become "FATHER/SON/HOLY SPIRIT" = do you know? does scripture tell us?

We agree that scripture tells us of the Trinity, and that the Word was with at the point of the beginning of creation. Thus the Trinity of persons are all already present, and therefore existent, at the moment creation begins to unfold.

We also agree that those who were existent before creation began are necessarily “uncreated”, thus they are eternal beings.

They are also “Omni” in scope of their attributes, one of which is omniscience, or being all knowing of all things in all ways.

The scripture tells us all of these things, and thus if we know that the second person of the eternally existing triad of persons is equally “Omni” and thus they all are cognizant of what their roles would be post creation. So there is never a point in which the second person of the Trinity is not appropriated as the “son” who is given, whose name will be called “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting (Eternal) Father, Prince of Peace.”

JESUS said God is a Spirit = do you believe Him?

The Word was too prior to the incarnation.

If God is a Spirit, how did HE beget a Son in eternity past?

1) With God, all things are possible! (Matt 19:26)
2) “only begotten” means “the only one” or “the unique one”. Begotten does not infer creation, or that there was a time when the Son didn’t exist.

Proverbs 30:5-6
Every word of God is flawless;
He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him.
Do not add to His words,
lest He rebuke you and prove you a liar.

In the subject matter at hand, I have never felt rebuked!


Doug

 

[DavidTree]

As far backwards as eternity future goes forward!


We agree that scripture tells us of the Trinity, and that the Word was with at the point of the beginning of creation. Thus the Trinity of persons are all already present, and therefore existent, at the moment creation begins to unfold.

We also agree that those who were existent before creation began are necessarily “uncreated”, thus they are eternal beings.

They are also “Omni” in scope of their attributes, one of which is omniscience, or being all knowing of all things in all ways.

The scripture tells us all of these things, and thus if we know that the second person of the eternally existing triad of persons is equally “Omni” and thus they all are cognizant of what their roles would be post creation. So there is never a point in which the second person of the Trinity is not appropriated as the “son” who is given, whose name will be called “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting (Eternal) Father, Prince of Peace.”





The Word was too prior to the incarnation.

1) With God, all things are possible! (Matt 19:26)
2) “only begotten” mean “the only one” or “the unique one”. Begotten does not infer creation, or that there was a time when the Son didn’t exist.



In the subject matter at hand, I have never felt rebuked!


Doug

I really like this post but it is late for me and i am falling asleep.

Will respond tomorrow - Good Night my Brothers @TibiasDad and @civic

 

[TibiasDad]

"He will be called..." is future tense so a declaration about what he "will be called" is not the same thing as calling him that. After that, no one even called him that in the Bible. So I ask again. Please quote the verse where the son is ever explicitly called eternal anywhere in the Bible.

The “son is given” is present tense, so all that will be attributed to him is already assumed by God as fact, for to him it is already done. That’s why he says that “his name will be (that is with certainty) called “everlasting Father” (or more accurately Father of eternity) either way, the “son given” is the ruler and master of eternity. You cannot be master over something that is greater than you. So the son is inherently eternal in nature to be qualified to rule over it!

Doug

 

[Dizerner]

How far back does eternity go...........do you know?

Eternity is outside of time, so it cannot "go back," see. Only time goes back. We use time words metaphorically for eternity to give us something of a picture of it. It's like infinity—if you ever just sit and try to think of infinite things, it feels impossible, like your mind will pop. And the reason for that is simply because our mind is not infinite, it cannot contain it. So we need to think of eternity not as "really, really old" or something "way, way back," rather something fundamentally different than time.

When in eternity past did Elohim become "FATHER/SON/HOLY SPIRIT" = do you know? does scripture tell us?

Excellent question, and really the heart of it all. I've been thinking about this question a bit again since this thread came up, and have some more thoughts to consider about it. Now if God were let's say, in his original state, not having the roles and relations that he later picks up in time, we basically do not have a Father and we do not have a Son, and I would argue the Spirit functionally plays the role of something like a Mother, and instead of the archetype family unit, we have basically three siblings who are perfectly equal in every sense. So God starts out triplets, basically.

Because to prove the eternal Sonship, we can do this in more than one way. We can simply prove the eternal Fathership of the Father. Because if the Father became Father God at some point, then he was before that simply Brother God. And we had three Brother Gods. But if we can prove the eternal Fathership of the Father, we have automatically, by logical entailment, proved the eternal Sonship of the Son. And of course that wouldn't work for someone like civic who wants to strip all fundamental distinction of what Son even means and make a Father-Son relationship something different than derivative, but we can dismiss that argument as simply making the term Son meaningless.

So we have two starting states for God relationally here:

BROTHER/BROTHER/BROTHER ---> which later at some point in time after creation turn into a familial heirarchy.

OR

FATHER/FUNCTIONAL MOTHER/SON ---> which never changes but displays something fundamental about God's character.

And we say functional here, because although there are many places the Spirit does have a feminine association, there are also places with a masculine association, and since God is Spirit, we can assume gender for him is not biological anyway.

But you make the mistake of using temporal words again in association with eternity. You say "eternity past," and this cannot be a literal phrase, because it would be self-contradicting. It is a metaphorical phrase to indicate to us that eternity was a state that existed logically prior to time. And in that sense it is "older," in that it came logically first, but not temporally first, as that would be an internal contradiction, and just make eternity a time before time.

Now for the question: Does Scripture indicate to us that God had eternal starting relations and heirarchy, versus God later taking those things up after creation? And for that answer, we may not get as direct an answer as we might like, since Scripture is not written like a text book or encyclopedia, but rather organically and naturally formed over time. We may have to make some deductions and inferences in the dataset we are given, and that is natural, and does not mean that a thing stated less clearly is no longer clear.

JESUS said God is a Spirit = do you believe Him?

If God is a Spirit, how did HE beget a Son in eternity past?

Yes, I 100% believe Jesus, that God is spirit. Now we should read it more like "God is spirit in quality," rather than "God is one singular spirit being." That is essentially, "God is spiritual. And those who worship him, must worship him spiritually and sincerely."

So, we see right away, that we should not apply the logic and timing of physical beings to God's relations, since God is spirit without the fleshly component. A major error over the years has always been to give God some kind of natural intrinsic physical body.

So what does spirit mean when it comes to familial relations? How are spirit beings related familially differently than natural or physical beings? Do they have the same limitations? Do they have the same locations? Do they utilize the same functions?

Again you use that misleading word, "eternity past." Eternity is not past, eternity is diametrically opposed to past, it's the opposite of past, eternity is transcending time, simply being above all past, above all present, and above all future. Eternity is not somehow "over and done with a long time ago," eternity still exists, because it is a timeless state completely outside of temporal constrictions.

And this is how God, being atemporal, does certain things in salvation, like unifying us with Christ before we even exist, and one of the strongest arguments against Open Theism or Dynamic Omniscience that seeks to limit God's future knowledge, God can put our actual individual sins laid upon Christ many years in the past or future before we have even committed the sins.

If we focus on the atemporal being and function of God, we can come to discover familial relations that we do not necessarily have to logically frame in time, or bind in our thinking to temporal restrictions, lowering God to our status, essentially making him a "bigger" version of us, that had to do things within the lowly constraints of time. God can do things outside of time.

And it is, indeed, outside of time, that Wisdom was formed as God's first companion rejoicing ever at his side in Proverbs, and it is indeed outside of time, that the firstborn of all Creation was in the Father's bosom, the Word being with God. And I take these things to be the Holy Spirit and God the Son respectively.

The argument that this makes them inferior or created, is simply a limitation of the capacity of our minds and understanding, because naturally, there will be things about the Creator that are simply beyond what the creation can even have the capacity to fully conceive in thought, because creations have natural limitations.

So in conclusion familial heirarchal relations outside of time do not denigrate or lower God to created or temporal status. The Father being eternally called a Father, and not adopting the term later at the Incarnation, shows us by logical proof that he was an eternal Father to something, because otherwise Father doesn't mean anything anymore, and thus shows us an Eternal Son.

 

[DavidTree]

Eternity is outside of time, so it cannot "go back," see. Only time goes back. We use time words metaphorically for eternity to give us something of a picture of it. It's like infinity—if you ever just sit and try to think of infinite things, it feels impossible, like your mind will pop. And the reason for that is simply because our mind is not infinite, it cannot contain it. So we need to think of eternity not as "really, really old" or something "way, way back," rather something fundamentally different than time.



Excellent question, and really the heart of it all. I've been thinking about this question a bit again since this thread came up, and have some more thoughts to consider about it. Now if God were let's say, in his original state, not having the roles and relations that he later picks up in time, we basically do not have a Father and we do not have a Son, and I would argue the Spirit functionally plays the role of something like a Mother, and instead of the archetype family unit, we have basically three siblings who are perfectly equal in every sense. So God starts out triplets, basically.

Because to prove the eternal Sonship, we can do this in more than one way. We can simply prove the eternal Fathership of the Father. Because if the Father became Father God at some point, then he was before that simply Brother God. And we had three Brother Gods. But if we can prove the eternal Fathership of the Father, we have automatically, by logical entailment, proved the eternal Sonship of the Son. And of course that wouldn't work for someone like civic who wants to strip all fundamental distinction of what Son even means and make a Father-Son relationship something different than derivative, but we can dismiss that argument as simply making the term Son meaningless.

So we have two starting states for God relationally here:

BROTHER/BROTHER/BROTHER ---> which later at some point in time after creation turn into a familial heirarchy.

OR

FATHER/FUNCTIONAL MOTHER/SON ---> which never changes but displays something fundamental about God's character.

And we say functional here, because although there are many places the Spirit does have a feminine association, there are also places with a masculine association, and since God is Spirit, we can assume gender for him is not biological anyway.

But you make the mistake of using temporal words again in association with eternity. You say "eternity past," and this cannot be a literal phrase, because it would be self-contradicting. It is a metaphorical phrase to indicate to us that eternity was a state that existed logically prior to time. And in that sense it is "older," in that it came logically first, but not temporally first, as that would be an internal contradiction, and just make eternity a time before time.

Now for the question: Does Scripture indicate to us that God had eternal starting relations and heirarchy, versus God later taking those things up after creation? And for that answer, we may not get as direct an answer as we might like, since Scripture is not written like a text book or encyclopedia, but rather organically and naturally formed over time. We may have to make some deductions and inferences in the dataset we are given, and that is natural, and does not mean that a thing stated less clearly is no longer clear.



Yes, I 100% believe Jesus, that God is spirit. Now we should read it more like "God is spirit in quality," rather than "God is one singular spirit being." That is essentially, "God is spiritual. And those who worship him, must worship him spiritually and sincerely."

So, we see right away, that we should not apply the logic and timing of physical beings to God's relations, since God is spirit without the fleshly component. A major error over the years has always been to give God some kind of natural intrinsic physical body.

So what does spirit mean when it comes to familial relations? How are spirit beings related familially differently than natural or physical beings? Do they have the same limitations? Do they have the same locations? Do they utilize the same functions?

Again you use that misleading word, "eternity past." Eternity is not past, eternity is diametrically opposed to past, it's the opposite of past, eternity is transcending time, simply being above all past, above all present, and above all future. Eternity is not somehow "over and done with a long time ago," eternity still exists, because it is a timeless state completely outside of temporal constrictions.

And this is how God, being atemporal, does certain things in salvation, like unifying us with Christ before we even exist, and one of the strongest arguments against Open Theism or Dynamic Omniscience that seeks to limit God's future knowledge, God can put our actual individual sins laid upon Christ many years in the past or future before we have even committed the sins.

If we focus on the atemporal being and function of God, we can come to discover familial relations that we do not necessarily have to logically frame in time, or bind in our thinking to temporal restrictions, lowering God to our status, essentially making him a "bigger" version of us, that had to do things within the lowly constraints of time. God can do things outside of time.

And it is, indeed, outside of time, that Wisdom was formed as God's first companion rejoicing ever at his side in Proverbs, and it is indeed outside of time, that the firstborn of all Creation was in the Father's bosom, the Word being with God. And I take these things to be the Holy Spirit and God the Son respectively.

The argument that this makes them inferior or created, is simply a limitation of the capacity of our minds and understanding, because naturally, there will be things about the Creator that are simply beyond what the creation can even have the capacity to fully conceive in thought, because creations have natural limitations.

So in conclusion familial heirarchal relations outside of time do not denigrate or lower God to created or temporal status. The Father being eternally called a Father, and not adopting the term later at the Incarnation, shows us by logical proof that he was an eternal Father to something, because otherwise Father doesn't mean anything anymore, and thus shows us an Eternal Son.

EXCELLENT POST

Just rising now and musty have coffee.

Will respond and - again - excellent post = Thank You

 

[civic]

Back to the OP which stands irrefutable. Both the Father and Son are eternal without beginning.

John 17:1, 5
“Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You,

And now, Father, glorify Me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

Notice above its the Son with the Father sharing the same glory together with Hm before creation, before the world came into existence. The same below. The Word who was God is the Son. Scripture interprets scripture. Hermeneutics 101.

Hebrews 1:1-2
1 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.

Verse 2 is talking about the son and it says that God made the universe through him, (in the context of him being a son).

Hebrews 1:8-12
But about the Son he says,

“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
9;You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy.”
10He also says,
“In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
11They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12You will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same,
and your years will never end.

Colossians 1:15-19

The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.


And Here Jesus who is both God and man says that the Father sent the Son. This shows the Son existing before becoming man.

John 3:17
"For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world should be saved through Him.

John tells us the same below:

1 John 4:9
This is how God’s love was revealed among us: God sent His one and only Son into the world, so that we might live through Him.

1 John 4:10
10In this is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son as the atoning sacrifice for our sins.

1 John 4:14
And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent His Son to be the Savior of the world.

As does Paul below:

Romans 8:3
For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful man, as an offering for sin. He thus condemned sin in the flesh,

Galatians 4:4-5
But when the time had fully come, God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, / to redeem those under the law, that we might receive our adoption as sons.

You cannot send Someone who does not exist, ie the Son.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

1 John 4:9. toward us—Greek, "in our case."

sent—Greek, "hath sent."

into the world—a proof against Socinians, that the Son existed before He was "sent into the world." Otherwise, too, He could not have been our life (1Jo 4:9), our "propitiation" (1Jo 4:10), or our "Saviour" (1Jo 4:14). It is the grand proof of God's love, His having sent "His only-begotten Son, that we might live through Him," who is the Life, and who has redeemed our forfeited life; and it is also the grand motive to our mutual love.

1 John 1:1-4
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ.

1 John 3:8- The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work.



We clearly see the Father in the O.T.

Isa 64:8 But now, O LORD, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand.

Isa 63:16 Doubtless thou art our father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not: thou, O LORD, art our father, our redeemer; thy name is from everlasting.

Deu 32:6 Do ye thus requite the LORD, O foolish people and unwise? is not he thy father that hath bought thee? hath he not made thee, and established thee?

Mal 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?

And the Son

Daniel 3:25
He answered and said, “Look! I see four men loosed and walking about in the midst of the fire without harm, and the appearance of the fourth is like the son of god

Psalm 2:12
Kiss his son, or he will be angry and your way will lead to your destruction, for his wrath can flare up in a moment. Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

Proverbs 30:4
Who has ascended into heaven and descended?Who has gathered the wind in His fists?Who has wrapped the waters in His garment?Who has established all the ends of the earth?What is His name or His son’s name?

Daniel 7:13
“In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like the son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence.

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.”

“Matthew’s use of ‘know’ ([epiginōskō is pronounced eh-pea-gih-noh-skoh, and the “g” is hard as in “get”] the present tense is gnomic, knowledge shared in eternal past, present, and eternal future) here is critical … it is likely that there is perfective force in the prefix [epi] –with the meaning ‘know exactly, completely, through and through’ (BAGD, 291), with the added idea of recognizing and acknowledging” (comment on 11:27).

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 (Matthew: Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament[Zondervan, 2010], p. 440). https://drjimsebt.com/2023/04/17/when-did-jesus-become-the-son-of-god/



John 5:26: For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. (John 5:26)

This grant 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.


John 17:24:
24 Father, those whom you have given me, I want them to be with me where I am, so that they may see my glory which you have given me because you have loved me before the foundation of the world. (My translation)

Being a Father implies a Son. What was the Father doing before the foundation or creation of the world? He was loving his Son.

John 1:18 says: “No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.” Jesus more fully reveals their status and nature–Father and Son–beyond God and Logos. Therefore the Father was in heaven with his Son before the incarnation and birth.

Jesus says that he was in the presence of the Father: “I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence” […] (John 8:38). The term “presence” can be translated as “alongside” or “next to” the Father. The point: they were in close relationship as we see 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.

Hebrews 1:2 says: “but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.” That verse says that the Son was the person through whom God made the universe. He was the Son before creation, long before his birth. That verses also identifies who the Logos was in John 1:1-4.

Hebrews 1:3:
The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being […] (Heb. 1:3)

God’s radiance and his being are eternal because light that does not radiate is not light, and God’s being is not temporary with a beginning; therefore the Son is also eternal

Lets discuss the Eternal Son of God.

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

Eternity is outside of time, so it cannot "go back," see. Only time goes back. We use time words metaphorically for eternity to give us something of a picture of it. It's like infinity—if you ever just sit and try to think of infinite things, it feels impossible, like your mind will pop. And the reason for that is simply because our mind is not infinite, it cannot contain it. So we need to think of eternity not as "really, really old" or something "way, way back," rather something fundamentally different than time.



Excellent question, and really the heart of it all. I've been thinking about this question a bit again since this thread came up, and have some more thoughts to consider about it. Now if God were let's say, in his original state, not having the roles and relations that he later picks up in time, we basically do not have a Father and we do not have a Son, and I would argue the Spirit functionally plays the role of something like a Mother, and instead of the archetype family unit, we have basically three siblings who are perfectly equal in every sense. So God starts out triplets, basically.

Because to prove the eternal Sonship, we can do this in more than one way. We can simply prove the eternal Fathership of the Father. Because if the Father became Father God at some point, then he was before that simply Brother God. And we had three Brother Gods. But if we can prove the eternal Fathership of the Father, we have automatically, by logical entailment, proved the eternal Sonship of the Son. And of course that wouldn't work for someone like civic who wants to strip all fundamental distinction of what Son even means and make a Father-Son relationship something different than derivative, but we can dismiss that argument as simply making the term Son meaningless.

So we have two starting states for God relationally here:

BROTHER/BROTHER/BROTHER ---> which later at some point in time after creation turn into a familial heirarchy.

OR

FATHER/FUNCTIONAL MOTHER/SON ---> which never changes but displays something fundamental about God's character.

And we say functional here, because although there are many places the Spirit does have a feminine association, there are also places with a masculine association, and since God is Spirit, we can assume gender for him is not biological anyway.

But you make the mistake of using temporal words again in association with eternity. You say "eternity past," and this cannot be a literal phrase, because it would be self-contradicting. It is a metaphorical phrase to indicate to us that eternity was a state that existed logically prior to time. And in that sense it is "older," in that it came logically first, but not temporally first, as that would be an internal contradiction, and just make eternity a time before time.

Now for the question: Does Scripture indicate to us that God had eternal starting relations and heirarchy, versus God later taking those things up after creation? And for that answer, we may not get as direct an answer as we might like, since Scripture is not written like a text book or encyclopedia, but rather organically and naturally formed over time. We may have to make some deductions and inferences in the dataset we are given, and that is natural, and does not mean that a thing stated less clearly is no longer clear.



Yes, I 100% believe Jesus, that God is spirit. Now we should read it more like "God is spirit in quality," rather than "God is one singular spirit being." That is essentially, "God is spiritual. And those who worship him, must worship him spiritually and sincerely."

So, we see right away, that we should not apply the logic and timing of physical beings to God's relations, since God is spirit without the fleshly component. A major error over the years has always been to give God some kind of natural intrinsic physical body.

So what does spirit mean when it comes to familial relations? How are spirit beings related familially differently than natural or physical beings? Do they have the same limitations? Do they have the same locations? Do they utilize the same functions?

Again you use that misleading word, "eternity past." Eternity is not past, eternity is diametrically opposed to past, it's the opposite of past, eternity is transcending time, simply being above all past, above all present, and above all future. Eternity is not somehow "over and done with a long time ago," eternity still exists, because it is a timeless state completely outside of temporal constrictions.

And this is how God, being atemporal, does certain things in salvation, like unifying us with Christ before we even exist, and one of the strongest arguments against Open Theism or Dynamic Omniscience that seeks to limit God's future knowledge, God can put our actual individual sins laid upon Christ many years in the past or future before we have even committed the sins.

If we focus on the atemporal being and function of God, we can come to discover familial relations that we do not necessarily have to logically frame in time, or bind in our thinking to temporal restrictions, lowering God to our status, essentially making him a "bigger" version of us, that had to do things within the lowly constraints of time. God can do things outside of time.

And it is, indeed, outside of time, that Wisdom was formed as God's first companion rejoicing ever at his side in Proverbs, and it is indeed outside of time, that the firstborn of all Creation was in the Father's bosom, the Word being with God. And I take these things to be the Holy Spirit and God the Son respectively.

The argument that this makes them inferior or created, is simply a limitation of the capacity of our minds and understanding, because naturally, there will be things about the Creator that are simply beyond what the creation can even have the capacity to fully conceive in thought, because creations have natural limitations.

So in conclusion familial heirarchal relations outside of time do not denigrate or lower God to created or temporal status. The Father being eternally called a Father, and not adopting the term later at the Incarnation, shows us by logical proof that he was an eternal Father to something, because otherwise Father doesn't mean anything anymore, and thus shows us an Eternal Son.

Brother implies a mother and father before the triplets existed. Not a good analogy. And there is not a single instance in all scripture where the Father, Son, Holy Spirit refer to one another as brother.

 

[Dizerner]

Brother implies a mother and father before the triplets existed. Not a good analogy. And there is not a single instance in all scripture where the Father, Son, Holy Spirit refer to one another as brother.

So now you claim derivation.

Lol, make up your mind one way or the other.

 

[Runningman]

The “son is given” is present tense, so all that will be attributed to him is already assumed by God as fact, for to him it is already done. That’s why he says that “his name will be (that is with certainty) called “everlasting Father” (or more accurately Father of eternity) either way, the “son given” is the ruler and master of eternity. You cannot be master over something that is greater than you. So the son is inherently eternal in nature to be qualified to rule over it!

Doug

Isaiah 9:6 is never directly said to be about Jesus anywhere in the Bible. Jesus became a son per Psalm 2:7.

 

[DavidTree]

Back to the OP which stands irrefutable. Both the Father and Son are eternal without beginning.

John 17:1, 5
“Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You,

And now, Father, glorify Me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

Notice above its the Son with the Father sharing the same glory together with Hm before creation, before the world came into existence. The same below. The Word who was God is the Son. Scripture interprets scripture. Hermeneutics 101.

Hebrews 1:1-2
1 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.

Verse 2 is talking about the son and it says that God made the universe through him, (in the context of him being a son).

Hebrews 1:8-12
But about the Son he says,

“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
9;You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy.”
10He also says,
“In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
11They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12You will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same,
and your years will never end.

Colossians 1:15-19

The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.


And Here Jesus who is both God and man says that the Father sent the Son. This shows the Son existing before becoming man.

John 3:17
"For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world should be saved through Him.

John tells us the same below:

1 John 4:9
This is how God’s love was revealed among us: God sent His one and only Son into the world, so that we might live through Him.

1 John 4:10
10In this is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son as the atoning sacrifice for our sins.

1 John 4:14
And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent His Son to be the Savior of the world.

As does Paul below:

Romans 8:3
For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful man, as an offering for sin. He thus condemned sin in the flesh,

Galatians 4:4-5
But when the time had fully come, God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, / to redeem those under the law, that we might receive our adoption as sons.

You cannot send Someone who does not exist, ie the Son.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

1 John 4:9. toward us—Greek, "in our case."

sent—Greek, "hath sent."

into the world—a proof against Socinians, that the Son existed before He was "sent into the world." Otherwise, too, He could not have been our life (1Jo 4:9), our "propitiation" (1Jo 4:10), or our "Saviour" (1Jo 4:14). It is the grand proof of God's love, His having sent "His only-begotten Son, that we might live through Him," who is the Life, and who has redeemed our forfeited life; and it is also the grand motive to our mutual love.

1 John 1:1-4
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ.

1 John 3:8- The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work.



We clearly see the Father in the O.T.

Isa 64:8 But now, O LORD, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand.

Isa 63:16 Doubtless thou art our father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not: thou, O LORD, art our father, our redeemer; thy name is from everlasting.

Deu 32:6 Do ye thus requite the LORD, O foolish people and unwise? is not he thy father that hath bought thee? hath he not made thee, and established thee?

Mal 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?

And the Son

Daniel 3:25
He answered and said, “Look! I see four men loosed and walking about in the midst of the fire without harm, and the appearance of the fourth is like the son of god

Psalm 2:12
Kiss his son, or he will be angry and your way will lead to your destruction, for his wrath can flare up in a moment. Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

Proverbs 30:4
Who has ascended into heaven and descended?Who has gathered the wind in His fists?Who has wrapped the waters in His garment?Who has established all the ends of the earth?What is His name or His son’s name?

Daniel 7:13
“In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like the son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence.

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.”

“Matthew’s use of ‘know’ ([epiginōskō is pronounced eh-pea-gih-noh-skoh, and the “g” is hard as in “get”] the present tense is gnomic, knowledge shared in eternal past, present, and eternal future) here is critical … it is likely that there is perfective force in the prefix [epi] –with the meaning ‘know exactly, completely, through and through’ (BAGD, 291), with the added idea of recognizing and acknowledging” (comment on 11:27).

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 (Matthew: Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament[Zondervan, 2010], p. 440). https://drjimsebt.com/2023/04/17/when-did-jesus-become-the-son-of-god/



John 5:26: For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. (John 5:26)

This grant 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.


John 17:24:
24 Father, those whom you have given me, I want them to be with me where I am, so that they may see my glory which you have given me because you have loved me before the foundation of the world. (My translation)

Being a Father implies a Son. What was the Father doing before the foundation or creation of the world? He was loving his Son.

John 1:18 says: “No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.” Jesus more fully reveals their status and nature–Father and Son–beyond God and Logos. Therefore the Father was in heaven with his Son before the incarnation and birth.

Jesus says that he was in the presence of the Father: “I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence” […] (John 8:38). The term “presence” can be translated as “alongside” or “next to” the Father. The point: they were in close relationship as we see 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.

Hebrews 1:2 says: “but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.” That verse says that the Son was the person through whom God made the universe. He was the Son before creation, long before his birth. That verses also identifies who the Logos was in John 1:1-4.

Hebrews 1:3:
The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being […] (Heb. 1:3)

God’s radiance and his being are eternal because light that does not radiate is not light, and God’s being is not temporary with a beginning; therefore the Son is also eternal

Lets discuss the Eternal Son of God.

hope this helps !!!

Back to the OP which stands irrefutable. Both the Father and Son are eternal without beginning.

Good Morning = We all AGREE on this TRUTH

We all AGREE on every Truth written of the Glory of the only begotten Son of God = from Genesis to Revelation

We all AGREE that the FATHER/SON/HOLY SPIRIT are One/Echad Elohim from Genesis chapter 1 and Forward
(with the exception of those on this forum who cannot SEE)

 

[civic]

So now you claim derivation.

Lol, make up your mind one way or the other.

The truth is you cannot use anthropomorphic terms and apply them to God. The terms Father/ Son are relational and eternal identities of the Godhead. There is no begetting in eternity as humans beget.

 

[DavidTree]

As far backwards as eternity future goes forward!

We agree that scripture tells us of the Trinity, and that the Word was with at the point of the beginning of creation. Thus the Trinity of persons are all already present, and therefore existent, at the moment creation begins to unfold.

We also agree that those who were existent before creation began are necessarily “uncreated”, thus they are eternal beings.

They are also “Omni” in scope of their attributes, one of which is omniscience, or being all knowing of all things in all ways.

The scripture tells us all of these things, and thus if we know that the second person of the eternally existing triad of persons is equally “Omni” and thus they all are cognizant of what their roles would be post creation. So there is never a point in which the second person of the Trinity is not appropriated as the “son” who is given, whose name will be called “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting (Eternal) Father, Prince of Peace.”

The Word was too prior to the incarnation.

1) With God, all things are possible! (Matt 19:26)
2) “only begotten” means “the only one” or “the unique one”. Begotten does not infer creation, or that there was a time when the Son didn’t exist.

In the subject matter at hand, I have never felt rebuked!

Doug

Good Morning

The scripture tells us all of these things, and thus if we know that the second person of the eternally existing triad of persons is equally “Omni” and thus they all are cognizant of what their roles would be post creation.

This right here is the Center of the Bullseye and a Direct Eternal TRUTH

So there is never a point in which the second person of the Trinity is not appropriated as the “son” who is given,

We do not know for the Scripture does not dictate to us as such.

whose name will be called “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting (Eternal) Father, Prince of Peace.”

This Truth undermines your statement of: "there is never a point in which the second person of the Trinity is not appropriated as the “son”"
Can you SEE that??? = the "son" who is to be born is called Mighty Elohim, Everlasting Father
Therefore the "son" who is the "Mighty Elohim" reverts back to Genesis chapter 1 and your exact point of Truth which you stated: We agree that scripture tells us of the Trinity, and that the Word was with at the point of the beginning of creation. Thus the Trinity of persons are all already present, and therefore existent, at the moment creation begins to unfold.

The Word was too prior to the incarnation.

Absolutely
Herein is a CLUE


Thank You Brother for an excellent post to agree with and to respond to.




IMPORTANT - i am not "rebuking" anyone but rather enjoying our conversing over the Scriptures
i post Prov 30:5-6 as the Platform upon which God commands us in approaching Him and in study of His words.
As you know, not many reverence this requirement as necessary for truthful fellowship and discernment.