DavidTree
Active Member
JESUS defined "assessment" for us = Matthew 4:4
ELohim also defined "assumptions" for us = Genesis 3:1-7
The Eternal Son
- Thread starter civic
- Start date
ELohim also defined "assumptions" for us = Genesis 3:1-7
FreeInChrist
Active Member
Correct. The problem is when Jesus AKA WORD actually was called the son, or assigned to be the son in eternity past.
IOW longer then about 6000 years ago when there is no record can be had. The closest we can find is in Daniel 7: 13-14
13 “I kept looking in the night visions, And behold, with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days And was presented before Him.
14“And to Him was given dominion, Glory and a kingdom, That all the peoples, nations and men of every language Might serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion Which will not pass away; And His kingdom is one Which will not be destroyed.
But the does bot refer to a Son who is begotten, and the does not say if the Son is from eternity past or perhaps was the title
given as God's plans were taking shape... because there is no mention of the Father either way in these verses.
I still maintain that if the Son was not the Son from all of eternity past, it takes nothing away from the fact that the Word became Jesus and He was born as the Son. From that point on He would always be referred to as the Son, and God as the Father.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
Look at Daniel 7:13 -14
13“I kept looking in the night visions, And behold, with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days And was presented before Him.
14“And to Him was given dominion, Glory and a kingdom, That all the peoples, nations and men of every language Might serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion Which will not pass away; And His kingdom is one Which will not be destroyed.
This is the only thing I have ever seen that is remotely similar.
And no mention when the idea of a Son of Man came into being.
Dizerner
Active Member
Dizerner
Active Member
DavidTree
Active Member
@civic and @praise_yeshua - speaking of presuppositions
"The Assumption of Mary refers to the belief that the Virgin Mary was taken up into heaven, body and soul, at the end of her earthly life. This doctrine was officially defined as a dogma of the Catholic Church by Pope Pius XII in 1950."
Are we doing this with "Eternal Son" ??? = i HOPE not = which is why i have spent this much time on the subject
AND
will not relinquish until the Scriptures are Searched as Commanded by the LORD
You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.
Dizerner
Active Member
Again, Scripture does not say "What will be his Son's name?" nor "What is the prophesied Son's name?"
It uses the present tense, and you are using the "prophecy card" to neutralize every verse that disagrees with you.
Dizerner
Active Member
I am NOT nor have I EVER been either a part of or predisposed towards the Roman Catholic Church, nor anything like it.
The user was spreading LIES about me I do not even know how he made up.
I am a CLASSICAL ARMINIAN, that most RCC would identify as PROTESTANT, although I don't personally like the label.
civic
Active Member
Nope they share the same attributes
civic
Active Member
Was there an origin with the Son ?
DavidTree
Active Member
Used in the present tense as a question = that could not be answered until the Word became flesh
AGREE = i have no problem with "Eternal Son"
What God does not approve from us is putting words in His Mouth which He never said (pre-trib).
We must succeed in His Will of finding the Truth on this subject/topic coming from HIM in the Scripture less we start another false teaching which is rampant today.
Last edited:
DavidTree
Active Member
AGREE = i have no problem with "Eternal Son"
Would you agree that this "vision" of Daniel 7:13-14 is a Prophecy as SEEN in Revelation
What God does not approve from us is putting words in His Mouth which He never said.
We must succeed in His Will of finding the Truth on this subject/topic coming from HIM in the Scripture less we start another false teaching which is rampant today.
DavidTree
Active Member
@FreeInChrist @civic @Red Baker @Dizerner @praise_yeshua
Did Revelation Solve the Mystery
Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him = Incarnation
And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen.
ETERNAL Elohim = “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord,
“who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”
Incarnation = “Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore.
Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war. His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had a name written that no one knew except Himself. He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, a
and His name is called The Word of God = Eternal Elohim
Did Revelation Solve the Mystery
Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him = Incarnation
And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen.
ETERNAL Elohim = “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord,
“who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”
Incarnation = “Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore.
Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war. His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had a name written that no one knew except Himself. He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, a
and His name is called The Word of God = Eternal Elohim
Last edited:
Dizerner
Active Member
Dizerner
Active Member
No, this is the Second Coming.
These are nuances, they are not essential doctrines.
civic
Active Member
DavidTree
Active Member
Second Coming is preceded by First Coming = His incarnation
This is ESSENTIAL Doctrine
DavidTree
Active Member
We can say that no one receives the Holy Spirit without first going to the SON
AND
we know that "no one comes to the FATHER but thru ME"
AND
"no one comes to the SON unless the FATHER calls/draws them"
Without THREE no one could be SAVED
civic
Active Member
I’m talking about before creation
DavidTree
Active Member
tyI’m talking about before creation
