The Eternal Son

Runningman said:
Found what I needed. Eternal life can't be with the Father unless the Father is also eternal.

1 John 1
1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our own eyes, which we have gazed upon and touched with our own hands—this is the Word of life. 2And this is the life that was revealed; we have seen it and testified to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was revealed to us.

3We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And this fellowship of ours is with the Father and with His Son, Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...
Nope the eternal life in that passage is the Son not the Father. Thanks for making my case for me :)
 
DavidTree said:
How can JESUS not be Eternal when HE promises eternal life to all who Believe on Him for Salvation?
Click to expand...
Unitarians are up a creek without a paddle when it comes to life and eternal life in the Son as the source.

Jesus emphatically declared life is found in Him and it’s His to give as well as eternal life.
 
DavidTree said:
How can JESUS not be Eternal when HE promises eternal life to all who Believe on Him for Salvation?
Click to expand...
Eternal life is also something Jesus received. He didn't also have it.

How can Jesus be eternal when he died and is now alive forever?

Revelation 1
17When I saw Him, I fell at His feet like a dead man. But He placed His right hand on me and said, “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last, 18the Living One. I was dead, and behold, now I am alive forever and ever! And I hold the keys of Death and of Hades.
 
civic said:
Nope God is not created but He is unique , one of a kind which is what Monogenes Theos means.

Next fallacy
Click to expand...
Mogenes means begotten as inconvenient as that is for you. It's a common, popular, and honest translation. So you don't believe in the begotten son of God, Jesus, who is not only called begotten, but is described as such?
 
Dizerner said:
Jesus didn't receive life, he said he was THE life.
Click to expand...
Jesus received his life:

John 5
26For as the Father has life in Himself, so also He has granted the Son to have life in Himself.

John 10
17The reason the Father loves Me is that I lay down My life in order to take it up again. 18No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of My own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from My Father.”
 
Runningman said:
Jesus received his life:
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree, but he also was THE life, which is an attribute of God.

So the only harmonization is that God is multi-personal and beget multiple persons within his essence.

The Word was in the bosom of the Father in the beginning.

And no, despite your wanton claims, people are not called gods willy nilly in Scripture, it's exceedingly rare.
 
Runningman said:
Jesus received his life:

John 5
26For as the Father has life in Himself, so also He has granted the Son to have life in Himself.

John 10
17The reason the Father loves Me is that I lay down My life in order to take it up again. 18No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of My own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from My Father.”
Click to expand...
It is very strange and quite bizarre that a person who has the sentence of death in them, to be rejecting the Gift of eternal life from the Author of LIFE................kinda like a person in the desert dying of thirst but refuses a drink from a Nomad because they do not want to drink from the same cup...........
 
Runningman said:
Mogenes means begotten as inconvenient as that is for you. It's a common, popular, and honest translation. So you don't believe in the begotten son of God, Jesus, who is not only called begotten, but is described as such?
Click to expand...
You don’t know what you are talking about.

MONOGENÊS

BAGD: "In the Johannine lit[erature] m[onogenês] is used only of Jesus. The mngs. only, unique may be quite adequate for all its occurrences

Louw & Nida: "Pertaining to what is unique in the sense of being the only one of the same kind or class - 'unique, only.'"

Moulton & Milligan: "Literally 'one of a kind,' 'only,' 'unique' (unicus), not 'only-begotten....'"

Grimm/Thayer: "Single of its kind, only, [A.V. only-begotten]." (Note that Thayer's insertion merely cites the KJV translation, which owes considerable debt to the Vulgate of Jerome, who translated monogenês "unigenitus").

NIDNTT: "The only begotten, or only....RSV and NEB render monogenês as 'only.' This meaning is supported by R. E. Brown, The Gospel According to John, Anchor Bible, I, 1966, 13 f., and D. Moody, “God’s Only Son: The Translation of John 3:16 in the Revised Standard Version,” JBL 72, 1953, 213-19. Lit. it means “of a single kind,” and could even be used in this sense of the Phoenix (1 Clem. 25:2). It is only distantly related to gennao, beget. The idea of “only begotten” goes back to Jerome who used unigenitus in the Vulg. to counter the Arian claim that Jesus was not begotten but made."

Newman: "Unique, only."

LSJ: "Only, single" (references John 1:14, the only NT verse cited).

TDNT: defines monogenês as "only begotten," but distinguishes between nouns ending in -genes and adverbs ending in -genês. The former denote the source of the derivation, the latter the nature of the derivation. Thus, the author (Buchsel) concludes that monogenêsmeans "of sole descent." But Pendrick argues strongly against this view:


monogenes (‎monogenh/$‎, NT:3439) is used five times, all in the writings of the apostle John, of Christ as the Son of God; it is translated "only begotten" in Heb 11:17 of the relationship of Isaac to Abraham.

With reference to Christ, the phrase "the only begotten from the Father," John 1:14, RV (see also the marg.), indicates that as the Son of God He was the sole representative of the Being and character of the One who sent Him. In the original the definite article is omitted both before "only begotten" and before "Father," and its absence in each case serves to lay stress upon the characteristics referred to in the terms used. The apostle's object is to demonstrate what sort of glory it was that he and his fellow apostles had seen. That he is not merely making a comparison with earthly relationships is indicated by para, "from." The glory was that of a unique relationship and the word "begotten" does not imply a beginning of His Sonship. It suggests relationship indeed, but must be distinguished from generation as applied to man.

We can only rightly understand the term "the only begotten" when used of the Son, in the sense of unoriginated relationship. "The begetting is not an event of time, however remote, but a fact irrespective of time. The Christ did not become, but necessarily and eternally is the Son. He, a Person, possesses every attribute of pure Godhood. This necessitates eternity, absolute being; in this respect He is not 'after' the Father" (Moule). The expression also suggests the thought of the deepest affection, as in the case of the OT word yachid, variously rendered, "only one," Gen 22:2,12; "only son," Jer 6:26; Amos 8:10; Zech 12:10; "only beloved," Prov 4:3, and "darling," Ps 22:20; 35:17.

In John 1:18 the clause "the only begotten son, which is in the bosom of the Father," expresses both His eternal union with the Father in the Godhead and the ineffable intimacy and love between them, the Son sharing all the Father's counsels and enjoying all His affections. Another reading is monogenes Theos, "God only-begotten." In John 3:16 the statement, "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son," must not be taken to mean that Christ became the only begotten son by incarnation. The value and the greatness of the gift lay in the Sonship of Him who was given. His Sonship was not the effect of His being given. In John 3:18 the phrase "the name of the only begotten son of God" lays stress upon the full revelation of God's character and will, His love and grace, as conveyed in the name of One who, being in a unique relationship to Him, was provided by Him as the object of faith. In 1 John 4:9 the statement "God hath sent His only begotten son into the world" does not mean that God sent out into the world one who at His birth in Bethlehem had become His Son. Cf. the parallel statement, "God sent forth the Spirit of His Son," Gal 4:6, RV, which could not mean that God sent forth One who became His Spirit when He sent Him. (from Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Copyright © 1985, Thomas Nelson Publishers.)

hope this helps !!!
 
civic said:
You don’t know what you are talking about.

MONOGENÊS

BAGD: "In the Johannine lit[erature] m[onogenês] is used only of Jesus. The mngs. only, unique may be quite adequate for all its occurrences

Louw & Nida: "Pertaining to what is unique in the sense of being the only one of the same kind or class - 'unique, only.'"

Moulton & Milligan: "Literally 'one of a kind,' 'only,' 'unique' (unicus), not 'only-begotten....'"

Grimm/Thayer: "Single of its kind, only, [A.V. only-begotten]." (Note that Thayer's insertion merely cites the KJV translation, which owes considerable debt to the Vulgate of Jerome, who translated monogenês "unigenitus").

NIDNTT: "The only begotten, or only....RSV and NEB render monogenês as 'only.' This meaning is supported by R. E. Brown, The Gospel According to John, Anchor Bible, I, 1966, 13 f., and D. Moody, “God’s Only Son: The Translation of John 3:16 in the Revised Standard Version,” JBL 72, 1953, 213-19. Lit. it means “of a single kind,” and could even be used in this sense of the Phoenix (1 Clem. 25:2). It is only distantly related to gennao, beget. The idea of “only begotten” goes back to Jerome who used unigenitus in the Vulg. to counter the Arian claim that Jesus was not begotten but made."

Newman: "Unique, only."

LSJ: "Only, single" (references John 1:14, the only NT verse cited).

TDNT: defines monogenês as "only begotten," but distinguishes between nouns ending in -genes and adverbs ending in -genês. The former denote the source of the derivation, the latter the nature of the derivation. Thus, the author (Buchsel) concludes that monogenêsmeans "of sole descent." But Pendrick argues strongly against this view:


monogenes (‎monogenh/$‎, NT:3439) is used five times, all in the writings of the apostle John, of Christ as the Son of God; it is translated "only begotten" in Heb 11:17 of the relationship of Isaac to Abraham.

With reference to Christ, the phrase "the only begotten from the Father," John 1:14, RV (see also the marg.), indicates that as the Son of God He was the sole representative of the Being and character of the One who sent Him. In the original the definite article is omitted both before "only begotten" and before "Father," and its absence in each case serves to lay stress upon the characteristics referred to in the terms used. The apostle's object is to demonstrate what sort of glory it was that he and his fellow apostles had seen. That he is not merely making a comparison with earthly relationships is indicated by para, "from." The glory was that of a unique relationship and the word "begotten" does not imply a beginning of His Sonship. It suggests relationship indeed, but must be distinguished from generation as applied to man.

We can only rightly understand the term "the only begotten" when used of the Son, in the sense of unoriginated relationship. "The begetting is not an event of time, however remote, but a fact irrespective of time. The Christ did not become, but necessarily and eternally is the Son. He, a Person, possesses every attribute of pure Godhood. This necessitates eternity, absolute being; in this respect He is not 'after' the Father" (Moule). The expression also suggests the thought of the deepest affection, as in the case of the OT word yachid, variously rendered, "only one," Gen 22:2,12; "only son," Jer 6:26; Amos 8:10; Zech 12:10; "only beloved," Prov 4:3, and "darling," Ps 22:20; 35:17.

In John 1:18 the clause "the only begotten son, which is in the bosom of the Father," expresses both His eternal union with the Father in the Godhead and the ineffable intimacy and love between them, the Son sharing all the Father's counsels and enjoying all His affections. Another reading is monogenes Theos, "God only-begotten." In John 3:16 the statement, "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son," must not be taken to mean that Christ became the only begotten son by incarnation. The value and the greatness of the gift lay in the Sonship of Him who was given. His Sonship was not the effect of His being given. In John 3:18 the phrase "the name of the only begotten son of God" lays stress upon the full revelation of God's character and will, His love and grace, as conveyed in the name of One who, being in a unique relationship to Him, was provided by Him as the object of faith. In 1 John 4:9 the statement "God hath sent His only begotten son into the world" does not mean that God sent out into the world one who at His birth in Bethlehem had become His Son. Cf. the parallel statement, "God sent forth the Spirit of His Son," Gal 4:6, RV, which could not mean that God sent forth One who became His Spirit when He sent Him. (from Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Copyright © 1985, Thomas Nelson Publishers.)

hope this helps !!!
Click to expand...
You may be able to lawyer your way around words, but you can't lawyer your way around the way something is described. Did you forget that Jesus is called a Son for a reason all over the Bible? This isn't in name only, but literally becasue Jesus was begotten.

Hebrews 1:5-6 explicitly refers to Jesus as God's offspring.
Colossians 1:15-18 describes Jesus as firstborn. All firstborns are born and none of them outrank their father.
Psalm 2:7 mentions a specific earth day in which God became Jesus' Father.
 
DavidTree said:
It is very strange and quite bizarre that a person who has the sentence of death in them, to be rejecting the Gift of eternal life from the Author of LIFE................kinda like a person in the desert dying of thirst but refuses a drink from a Nomad because they do not want to drink from the same cup...........
Click to expand...
Ok, and?
 
Runningman said:
You may be able to lawyer your way around words, but you can't lawyer your way around the way something is described. Did you forget that Jesus is called a Son for a reason all over the Bible? This isn't in name only, but literally becasue Jesus was begotten.

Hebrews 1:5-6 explicitly refers to Jesus as God's offspring.
Colossians 1:15-18 describes Jesus as firstborn. All firstborns are born and none of them outrank their father.
Psalm 2:7 mentions a specific earth day in which God became Jesus' Father.
Click to expand...
He is called the Son and is the Son before creation as scripture testifies.

Next fallacy
 

Similar threads

civic
What does it mean that Jesus is the Only Begotten Son ?
2 3 4
Replies
62
Views
407
Tothalordbeallglory
T
Olde Tymer
About Contacting God's Son
2
Replies
20
Views
257
dwight92070
D
civic
The Virgin Birth
4 5 6
Replies
114
Views
975
Tothalordbeallglory
T
Complete
God's Provision
Replies
10
Views
133
Complete
Complete
John Evens
What image of Jesus do you get from reading the Gospels?
Replies
12
Views
153
Pancho Frijoles
Pancho Frijoles
Back
Top Bottom