Runningman
Well-known member
Absolutely. You obviously have a very clear grasp on basic reading comprehension. Your understanding not only aligns with English grammar, but is theologically sound.
The Trinity The Touchstone of Truth
- Thread starter Rowan
- Start date
101G
Well-known member
Runningman
Well-known member
There is a lot more, but the Bible consistently says that Jesus is God's begotten son. Since Jesus was begotten, sons are begotten, and God is Jesus' Father, then we have direct evidence from the Bible that by the fact of Jesus being begotten that he didn't always exist.
The Bible is explicit that "today" God became his Father.
Hebrews 1
5For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
John 1
14And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Matthew 1
20But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. 21And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Luke 1
35And the angel answered and said unto her, 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.
John 3
16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
101G
Well-known member
To all,
Reading English, and understanding English is another thing. Listen, Revelation 1:4 "John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;" Revelation 1:5 "And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,"
if one read this BASIC English, one would think or believe that this revelation is from three person.
A. Person #1, "from him which is, and which was, and which is to come", many say ..... (the Father).
B. Person #2. "and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;", many say ..... (the Holy Spirit).
C. Person #3. "And from Jesus Christ", a no-brainer there.
if one say this revelation is from three persons, THEY WOULD BE IN ERROR. this revelation is from ONE person who is the "which is, and which was, and which is to come", the I AM (Which is), Genesis 1:1. THAT (Which was), John 1:1. and I AM (Which is to come), Revelation 1:1. Yes, YHWH, I AM THAT I AM. just as the angel said,. Revelation 22:6 "And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done." YES, the Lord God of the holy prophets, YHWH, I AM THAT I AM, JESUS, the Holy Spirit, to come in flesh.
101G.
Reading English, and understanding English is another thing. Listen, Revelation 1:4 "John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;" Revelation 1:5 "And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,"
if one read this BASIC English, one would think or believe that this revelation is from three person.
A. Person #1, "from him which is, and which was, and which is to come", many say ..... (the Father).
B. Person #2. "and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;", many say ..... (the Holy Spirit).
C. Person #3. "And from Jesus Christ", a no-brainer there.
if one say this revelation is from three persons, THEY WOULD BE IN ERROR. this revelation is from ONE person who is the "which is, and which was, and which is to come", the I AM (Which is), Genesis 1:1. THAT (Which was), John 1:1. and I AM (Which is to come), Revelation 1:1. Yes, YHWH, I AM THAT I AM. just as the angel said,. Revelation 22:6 "And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done." YES, the Lord God of the holy prophets, YHWH, I AM THAT I AM, JESUS, the Holy Spirit, to come in flesh.
101G.
Runningman
Well-known member
Before he was born he was no one. I can prove it, too, just by sheer absence of evidence. Please show where Jesus was saying or doing anything before his birth if you think otherwise.
civic
Well-known member
We are talking about the Sons preexistence which I have dozens of verses to suppprt it. You are conflating monogenes with huios.
You should stay away from the Greek since it’s a stumbling block for you and your comprehension of scripture.
Next fallacy
Runningman
Well-known member
It refers to Jesus being begotten in a procreative sense of the word. Do you deny that Jesus is literally God's son now? The Bible says he is.
And you made a second claim that is almost funny. Where did Jesus say or do anything before he was born?
Runningman
Well-known member
Here's an exercise in basic logic and reading comprehension with Revelation 1:1. Can you see that the revelation Jesus had is not something he inherently had until God gave it to him? Do you have something before it was given to you?
KJV
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
101G
Well-known member
to all, Correct, the term Son, G5207 huios is not biological in NATURE, it's in character, or one's moral characteristics. either of God, or of, the devil.
and begotten, is not restricted to ... again biology. one can be begotten by Spiritual means.
to all... keep this in mind when learning about God. Romans 8:5 "For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit." Romans 8:6 "For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace." Romans 8:7 "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." Romans 8:8 "So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God." Romans 8:9 "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." Romans 8:10 "And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness."
101G.
civic
Well-known member
it can at His birth and baptism and resurrection but it can also mean there is a eternal aspect as well as a temporal one depending on the context with monogenes. You cannot take one meaning /definition when there are several and apply it to every usage of the word- thats known as eisegesis which is what you are doing.
This is for the readers and bible students below with an open mind to the TRUTH.
Mono-genes Kittle
"only-begotten [Mono-genes]
Usage outside the New Testament: In compounds like [Greek] suggests derivation [Greek] rather than birth. Nouns as the first part of the compound give the source, e.g., from Zeus, the earth. Adverbs describe the nature of the derivation, e.g., noble or common. Mono-genes is to be explained along the lines [Greek], rather than [Greek]. The genes does not denote the source (footnote: "Deriving from one alone" would be meaningless) but the nature of derivation. Hence Mono-genes, means "of sole descent," i.e., without brothers or sisters. This gives us the sense of only-begotten. The ref. is to the only child of one's parents, primarily in relation to them. Mono-genes is stronger than [Greek], for it denotes that they have never had more than this child. But the word can also be used more generally without ref. to derivation in the sense of "unique," "unparalleled," "incomparable,"
B. The Use in the New Testament: 1. In the NT Mono-genes occurs only in Lk, Jn. and Hb., not Mk., Mt. or Pl. It is thus found only in later writings. It means "only-begotten." Thus in Hb. Isaac is the Mono-genes, of Abraham (11:17), in Lk. the dead man raised up again at Nain is the only son of his mother (7:12). the daughter of Jairus is the only child (8:42), and the demoniac boy is the only son of his father (8:42). 2. Only Jn. uses Mono-genes, to describe the relation of Jesus to God. Mk. ... The further step taken by Jn. to describe Jesus corresponds to the fact that believers who as children of God are called [Greek] the same word as is applied to Jesus - in Mt., Pl. etc., are always called [Greek] in Jn., 1:12; 11:52; 1 Jn.3:1, 2, 10; 5:2, while [Greek] is reserved for Jesus. Jn. emphasizes more strongly the distinction between Jesus and believers and the uniqueness of Jesus in His divine sonship. It is not that Jesus is not unique in this sonship for Mt., Pl. etc. also. His Messiah-ship proves this. But Jn. puts it in an illuminating and easily remembered formula which was taken up into the baptismal confession and which ever since has formed an inalienable part of the creed of the Church. To Mono-genes, as a designation of Jesus corresponds the fact that God is the [Greek], of Jesus, Jn. 5:18; for [Greek], means to be in a special relation to Jesus which excludes the same relation to others. Mono-genes occurs in Jn. 1:14,18; 3:16,18; 1 Jn. 4:9. What is meant is plainest in Jn. 3:16 and I Jn. 4:9. Because Jesus is the only Son of God, His sending into the world is the supreme proof of God's love for the world. On the other side, it is only as the only-begotten Son of God that Jesus can mediate life and salvation from perdition. For life is given only in Him, Jn. 5:26. But the fact that He is the only-begotten Son means also that men are obligated to believe in Him, and that they come under judgment, indeed, have done so already, if they withhold faith from Him, 3:18. Mono-genes is thus a predicate of majesty. This is true in Jn. 1:18. Here we are to read [Greek]. 14 As the only-begotten Son Jesus is in the closest intimacy with God. There is no other with whom God can have similar fellowship. He shares everything with this Son. For this reason Jesus can give what no man can give, namely, the fullest possible eye-witness account of God. He knows God, not just from hearsay, but from incomparably close intercourse with Him. In 3:16, 18; 1 Jn. 4:9; 1: 18 the relation of Jesus is not just compared to that of an only child to its father. It is the relation of the only-begotten to the Father. Similarly in Jn. 1:14: [Greek], His glory is not just compared with that of an only child; it is described as that of the only-begotten Son. Grammatically both interpretations are justifiable. But the total usage of Mono-genes is very emphatically against taking [Greek] Mono-genes as a mere comparison. In Jn. 1: 14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 Jn. 4:9 Mono-genes denotes more than the uniqueness or Incomparability of Jesus. In all these verses He is expressly called the Son, and He is regarded as such in 1-14. In Jn. Mono-genes denotes the origin of Jesus. He is Mono-genes, as the only-begotten. What Jn. means by [Greek] Mono-genes [Greek] in detail can be known in its full import only in the light of the whole of John's proclamation. For [Greek] is simply a special form of [Greek] Mono-genes [Greek]. When Jn. speaks of the Son of God, he has primarily in view the man Jesus Christ, though not exclusively the man, but also the risen and pre-existent Lord. The relation of the pre-existent Lord to God is that of Son to Father. This comes out Indisputably in 17:5, 24. Jesus is aware that He was with God, and was loved by Him, and endued with glory, before the foundation of the world. This is personal fellowship with God, divine sonship. It is true that neither In the prologue, nor 8:58, nor c. 17 does Jn. use the term "son" for the pre-existent Lord. But He describes His relation to God as that of a son. To maintain that in Jn. the pre-existent Lord is only the Word, and that the Son is only the historical and risen Lord, is to draw too sharp a line between the pre-existence on the one side and the historical and post-historical life on the other. In Jn. the Lord is always the Son. Because He alone was God's Son before the foundation of the world, because the whole love of the Father is for Him alone, because He alone is one with God, because the title God may be ascribed to Him alone, He is the only-begotten Son of God. (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament", Gerhard Kittel, Buchsel, 1967, Vol. IV, p 737-741)
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 here...But some (e.g., WBauer, Hdb.) prefer to regard m[onogenês] as somewhat heightened in mng. in J and 1J to only-begotten or begotten of the Only One." (Bauer, it will be remembered, believed the Gospel of John was a gnostic text, and hence saw a theology behind John's writing compatible with the creation of the Logos as a semi-divine intermediary between the Monas and the creation with which He could not directly interact).
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 monogenês means "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 !!!
101G
Well-known member
question, "WHO SENT ... HIS" .... angel. God, the Lord God of the holy prophets, and that's JESUS, Oh my God...... when will they ever learn.
good day.
101G.
civic
Well-known member
yes a distinction with a difference which the other poster will not admit because his doctrine will not allow him , he has a bias therefor rejects the lexical definiitons and scriptures which condradicts his beliefs.
Runningman
Well-known member
That's just your philosophy and theology. Do you deny that Jesus was literally born of a woman and was birthed? Does the word literally refer to Jesus being Father in the procreative sense of the word by God? You're missing the simplicity of the language and context because you desperately need Jesus to not be the begotten son of God. He was the son of God when he was born. You also never dealt with the fact that this is directly stated in Hebrews 1:5 and uses the word gennaó to refer to Jesus as having been birthed in both a physical and spiritual sense. Jesus was created dude.
G1080. gennaó
Strong's Lexicon
gennaó: To beget, to give birth, to bring forth, to produce.
Original Word: γεννάω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: gennaó
Pronunciation: ghen-nah'-o
Phonetic Spelling: (ghen-nah'-o)
Definition: To beget, to give birth, to bring forth, to produce.
Meaning: I beget (of the male), (of the female) I bring forth, give birth to.
Word Origin: From the Greek root γένος (genos), meaning "race" or "kind."
Corresponding Greek / Hebrew Entries: The Hebrew equivalent often associated with γεννάω is יָלַד (yalad), which means "to bear, bring forth, beget."
Usage: The verb γεννάω (gennaó) primarily means "to beget" or "to give birth." It is used in the New Testament to describe both physical birth and spiritual rebirth. In a physical sense, it refers to the act of a father begetting or a mother giving birth to a child. In a spiritual context, it is often used to describe the process of being "born again" or "born of God," signifying a spiritual transformation and new life in Christ.
Cultural and Historical Background: In the ancient Greco-Roman world, lineage and ancestry were of great importance, often determining one's social status and inheritance rights. The concept of being "born again" would have been a radical idea, especially for Jewish audiences who valued physical descent from Abraham. The New Testament writers used γεννάω to convey the transformative power of faith in Jesus Christ, emphasizing a spiritual lineage that transcends physical ancestry.
HELPS Word-studies
1080 gennáō – properly, beget (procreate a descendant), produce offspring; (passive) be born, "begotten."
source: https://biblehub.com/greek/1080.htm
civic
Well-known member
wrong again we are discussing monogenes.
Since you are rejecting synonyms, you are stacking the deck. If you wanted a search for a specific Greek word, then you should have said that only the use of that Greek word was pertinent to your question. If you wanted an honest discussion, you would invite the discussion that has ensued regarding the prayers to Jesus in recognition at least in recognition of his deity in a veiled sense, like the Centurion who realized the authority of Jesus of asking for the healing of his daughter.
But you probably twist that into something like a non-heavenly word of faith heresy since you say Jesus was just a human and not sent from anywhere.
civic
Well-known member
ditto
We do not see one misconception of scripture happening here. Eventually the extension of misconceptions appear in the unitarian error. If the unitarians wanted to prove their point, just make a book dealing with the pertinent verses they see used in the Trinitarian doctrine and explain all those together -- and probably passages like Jesus walking on water -- which some just claim is what regular humans always could do.
The unitarian approach is like guerilla warfare -- of doing random attacks against scripture but never dealing with the whole of scripture. It is hard to imagine that the unitarian arguments are anything beyond scattered superficial challenges.
Runningman
Well-known member
I got that, but let's see what else John said about the Word, taking in all of the writings and rightly dividing them.
Did John call the Word a thing when he referred to the Word as a that, which, and it?
1 John 1 KJV
1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2(For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us 3That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.
Similar threads
