civic
Active Member
It’s one of the better creeds
Your Views on The Trinity
- Thread starter Cyrus
- Start date
FreeInChrist
Active Member
Peterlag
Active Member
I don't see what you see.
Peterlag
Active Member
52 Reasons why Jesus is not God...
1.) The word "Trinity" is not in the Bible.
2.) There is no clear Trinitarian formula in the Bible.
3.)The idea that "the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and together make one God" is not found in Scripture.
4.) God is spirit, and Jesus said he was not a spirit even after his resurrection (Luke 24:39).
5.) Jesus is very plainly called a man many times in Scripture.
6.) God was not born, but is eternal.
7.) Romans 5:19 says a man had to pay for the sins of mankind.
8.) The man Jesus is the mediator between God and men (1 Timothy 2:5).
9.) Jesus called the Father "my God" both before and after his resurrection.
10.) Jesus said my Father is greater than I (John 14:28).
11.) It was God that made Jesus "Lord" (Acts 2:36).
12.) Jesus would have already been the Lord if he was God.
13.) In the future Jesus will be subject to the Father (1 Corinthians 15:28).
14.) Jesus was "sanctified" by God. God does not need to be sanctified.
15.) There is only one who is good and that is God (Luke 18:19).
16.) God is greater than Christ (1 Corinthians 3:23).
17.) It was God who did miracles and wonders through Christ.
18.) Christ was given all authority. He would have already had all authority if he were God (Matthew 28:18).
19.) The phrase "Deity" never appears in the Bible, nor is Christ ever called "Deity."
20.) Ephesians 4:5 says there is one Lord.
21.) 1 Corinthians 8:6 says there is one God.
22.) Jesus called the Father the only God (John 5:44).
23.) Christ made a distinction between speaking against him and the Holy Spirit.
24.) Christ said his doctrine was not his own (John 7:16).
25.) Jesus and God have separate wills (Luke 22:42).
26.) Jesus counted himself and his Father as two (John 8:17).
27.) The Bible always portrays God and Christ as two separate beings.
28.) The Bible makes it clear that Jesus is an "heir" of God (Romans 8:7).
29.) Jesus grew in wisdom, but God is all wise.
30.) Jesus had limited knowledge (mark 13:32).
31.) God made Jesus perfect through suffering (Hebrews 2:10).
32.) Jesus received the holy spirit at his baptism. He would have already had it if he were God.
33.) Jesus was tempted. God cannot be tempted.
34.) Angels ministered and strengthened Jesus. God does not need to be strengthened.
35.) Jesus died. God cannot die.
36.) Jesus says we are his brothers. The Bible never says or even hints that we are brothers of God.
37.) We are told to do greater works than Jesus. Nobody can do greater works than God.
38.) Jesus would have already had "all authority" if he were God and would not need to be given “all authority” Matthew 28:18).
39.) Jesus would have already had “a name above every name”if he were God and would not need to be given “a name above every name” (Philippians 2:9).
40.) Jesus would have already had "Glory" if he were God and would not need to be given "Glory" (John 17:22, 24).
41.) Jesus would have already been "Appointed" if he were God and would not need to be “Appointed” over the Church (Ephesians 1:22)
42.) Jesus was not unoriginated. Christ was the only begotten Son of God (John 3:16).
43.) Jesus was not self-existent. “I live because of the Father” (John 6:57).
44.) Jesus was not immortal. Jesus died and God resurrected him (Acts 13:30).
45.) Jesus was not all wise. Jesus “grew in wisdom” (Luke 2:52).
46.) Jesus was not all-powerful. Christ said “the Son can do nothing by Himself” (John 5:19).
47.) Jesus was not omnipresent. Jesus said after Lazarus died “I am glad I was not there” (John 11:15).
48.) Jesus is called the "Son of God" more than 50 times. Not once is he called "God the Son."
49.) The apostles also taught Jesus was a man (Act 2:22).
50.) The Bible teaches God is the “head” of Christ (Corinthians 11:3).
51.) The supposed “dual nature” of Christ is never stated in the Bible.
52.) There's no verse in the Bible that says we should believe or confess that Jesus is God.
1.) The word "Trinity" is not in the Bible.
2.) There is no clear Trinitarian formula in the Bible.
3.)The idea that "the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and together make one God" is not found in Scripture.
4.) God is spirit, and Jesus said he was not a spirit even after his resurrection (Luke 24:39).
5.) Jesus is very plainly called a man many times in Scripture.
6.) God was not born, but is eternal.
7.) Romans 5:19 says a man had to pay for the sins of mankind.
8.) The man Jesus is the mediator between God and men (1 Timothy 2:5).
9.) Jesus called the Father "my God" both before and after his resurrection.
10.) Jesus said my Father is greater than I (John 14:28).
11.) It was God that made Jesus "Lord" (Acts 2:36).
12.) Jesus would have already been the Lord if he was God.
13.) In the future Jesus will be subject to the Father (1 Corinthians 15:28).
14.) Jesus was "sanctified" by God. God does not need to be sanctified.
15.) There is only one who is good and that is God (Luke 18:19).
16.) God is greater than Christ (1 Corinthians 3:23).
17.) It was God who did miracles and wonders through Christ.
18.) Christ was given all authority. He would have already had all authority if he were God (Matthew 28:18).
19.) The phrase "Deity" never appears in the Bible, nor is Christ ever called "Deity."
20.) Ephesians 4:5 says there is one Lord.
21.) 1 Corinthians 8:6 says there is one God.
22.) Jesus called the Father the only God (John 5:44).
23.) Christ made a distinction between speaking against him and the Holy Spirit.
24.) Christ said his doctrine was not his own (John 7:16).
25.) Jesus and God have separate wills (Luke 22:42).
26.) Jesus counted himself and his Father as two (John 8:17).
27.) The Bible always portrays God and Christ as two separate beings.
28.) The Bible makes it clear that Jesus is an "heir" of God (Romans 8:7).
29.) Jesus grew in wisdom, but God is all wise.
30.) Jesus had limited knowledge (mark 13:32).
31.) God made Jesus perfect through suffering (Hebrews 2:10).
32.) Jesus received the holy spirit at his baptism. He would have already had it if he were God.
33.) Jesus was tempted. God cannot be tempted.
34.) Angels ministered and strengthened Jesus. God does not need to be strengthened.
35.) Jesus died. God cannot die.
36.) Jesus says we are his brothers. The Bible never says or even hints that we are brothers of God.
37.) We are told to do greater works than Jesus. Nobody can do greater works than God.
38.) Jesus would have already had "all authority" if he were God and would not need to be given “all authority” Matthew 28:18).
39.) Jesus would have already had “a name above every name”if he were God and would not need to be given “a name above every name” (Philippians 2:9).
40.) Jesus would have already had "Glory" if he were God and would not need to be given "Glory" (John 17:22, 24).
41.) Jesus would have already been "Appointed" if he were God and would not need to be “Appointed” over the Church (Ephesians 1:22)
42.) Jesus was not unoriginated. Christ was the only begotten Son of God (John 3:16).
43.) Jesus was not self-existent. “I live because of the Father” (John 6:57).
44.) Jesus was not immortal. Jesus died and God resurrected him (Acts 13:30).
45.) Jesus was not all wise. Jesus “grew in wisdom” (Luke 2:52).
46.) Jesus was not all-powerful. Christ said “the Son can do nothing by Himself” (John 5:19).
47.) Jesus was not omnipresent. Jesus said after Lazarus died “I am glad I was not there” (John 11:15).
48.) Jesus is called the "Son of God" more than 50 times. Not once is he called "God the Son."
49.) The apostles also taught Jesus was a man (Act 2:22).
50.) The Bible teaches God is the “head” of Christ (Corinthians 11:3).
51.) The supposed “dual nature” of Christ is never stated in the Bible.
52.) There's no verse in the Bible that says we should believe or confess that Jesus is God.
Last edited:
The Apostles' Creed was an earlier one and is not quite as clear about the divinity of Christ. The creeds and confessions have been helpful in part to summarize beliefs for general Christians and to constrain seminary professors to orthodox views (but sometimes allowing a person to acknowledge some uncertainty about a point or two). The creeds and confessions became more specific as time progressed where people held divergent views that fit an older creed but could not confess a more specific one, like Athanasius creed.
Despite these 52 reasons, the Bible demonstrates the divinity of Christ in the Godhead. God works against the odds on our behalf.
I couldn't agree more. That is the very Definition of "GOD" that I posted in response to Civics' question. Jesus defined His Father in the same way. That is not the definition of a "person" though, in my view.
Yes, as I posted;
God "a superhuman being or spirit worshipped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity".
I never made an argument against this truth in any way.
He said, "So "your" god is impersonal". I was addressing his mockery.
I'm more interested in what the Scriptures teach, and "doing" the Sayings of the Christ "of the bible", by whom all things were created.
Not really into the "Triune God" that is promoted by this world's religions since the Tower of Babel.
He is the Holy Spirit. The prince of this world, is another spirit, "the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience".
In your religion this is true.
But the Christ "of the Bible" says, "and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.
The Spirit of Christ in on Moses says, "“Be strong and courageous. Do not fear or be in dread of them, for it is the Lord your God who goes with you. He will not leave you or forsake you."
The Spirit of Christ in the Hebrews author says, Heb. 13:5 Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.
The Spirit of Christ on Joshua says;
Joshua 1:9, “Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be frightened, and do not be dismayed, for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go.”
The Spirit of Christ in Isaiah says:
Is. 41:10 “Fear not, for I am with you; be not dismayed, for I am your God; I will strengthen you, I will help you, I will uphold you with my righteous right hand.”
So your Jesus is not a spirit. But the Christ "of the Bible" most certainly is. At least for those who believe HIS Sayings.
In all respect, you don't see what Paul sees. It is his words that I posted, and the Christ's Words who told me of His relationship before being found in the fashion of a man.
Nevertheless, it is good for men to discuss and seek God's Truth by studying what is actually written in Scriptures.
civic
Active Member
No the Father is not as per Jesus in Matthew 28:18-20. They are not each other. Father , Son and Holy Spirit as Jesus told His disciples
Peterlag
Active Member
I do not believe the idea that you posted is Paul's words, but rather your view of them.
Stop borrowing pages out of the Jehovah Witness bible.
As far as details of finding the essence of God through scattered passages, the same tapestry of passages work together to define who the messiah would be and what all he would accomplish. Likewise, the prophecies that underlie Matthew 24, Luke 21, and Mark 13 exist across various prophets. None tell the whole story. Effectively, the unitarian complains against the very approaches commonly found in scripture.
Runningman
Active Member
Unfortunately, almost none of it is found in Scripture. That's a red flag.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
What Trinitarians see is Psalm 2:7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
AND
John 1: 1 which you know, we all know.
affirming that Jesus is both fully divine and co-eternal with God the Father.
Now knowing that you will not read the following to the end, if you even start it... I suggest you take your argument directly
to the author Charles Lee Irons, PhD, is an adjunct professor at California Graduate School of Theology. He maintains a website of biblical and theological studies at www.upperregister.com.
I also did not copy all in hopes you will read what I post
And should you want more
The full text of this article in PDF format can be obtained by clicking here. (Do so in the link)For further information about to the CHRISTIAN RESEARCH JOURNAL go to: http://www.equip.org/christian-research-journal/Begotten of the Father before All Ages: The Biblical Basis of Eternal Generation according to the Church Fathers
Author:Charles Lee Irons
•
This article first appeared in the CHRISTIAN RESEARCH JOURNAL, volume 40, number 01 (2017). The full text of this article in PDF format can be obtained by clicking here. For further information about to the CHRISTIAN RESEARCH JOURNAL go to: http://www.equip.org/christian-research-journal/
SYNOPSIS
The purpose of this essay is to understand the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son. Eternal generation is not a philosophical speculation, nor a theological deduction, but an exegetically grounded doctrine. The church fathers appealed to several biblical texts in both the Old and New Testament in support of their conviction that the Son is eternally begotten of the Father. The concept of begetting is a metaphor drawn from the embodied experience of human fathers begetting human sons. This doctrine is important because it is crucial to defending the full deity of the Son, and it is the linchpin of the classical doctrine of the Trinity.
Throughout the fourth century, the church fathers1 were engaged in a bitter debate with Arianism, and it was within the context of that debate that they clarified the church’s doctrine of the Trinity. Arianism was the view that the Son is a subdeity who did not always exist but was created by God as the first and most glorious being in the universe, “the firstborn of all creation.” Arians affirmed the preexistence of Christ — He existed as the Logos before His virgin birth. But they denied the eternal preexistence of Christ. They said there was a time when He did not exist, and that before His generation, He did not exist. They said He was created out of the things that do not exist. Although He is the most glorious and first creature made by God, and can even be called “God” in some sense because of His exalted honor and divine glory, He falls on the creature side of the Creator-creature distinction.
In response, the church fathers appealed to the scriptural teaching that the Son is not a creature external to God but is the eternal offspring of the Father and proper to the very essence of God. As the bishops confessed at the first ecumenical council at Nicaea (325), the church believes “in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father only-begotten, that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father”2 (emphasis added). The contrast “begotten, not made” is a broadside against Arianism. As Athanasius put it, “The Son is other than things originate [i.e., created], alone the proper offspring of the Father’s essence.”3 The church fathers saw a massive distinction between a creature made by God and an offspring eternally begotten of God.
THE BIBLICAL BASIS OF ETERNAL GENERATION
The doctrine of the eternal generation or begetting of the Son was not concocted by means of philosophical speculation. Nor was it primarily a theological deduction from the correlative names “Father” and “Son.” Rather, the Son’s personal property of being eternally begotten of the Father was grounded in the explicit teaching of Scripture. The church fathers appealed to a number of verses in both the New Testament and the Old Testament (interpreted in light of the New), which they read as teaching that the Son is “begotten, not made.” Let’s review some of these key passages.
The Old Testament Evidence
The first Old Testament text cited by the church fathers is Psalm 2:7, which says, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you” (ESV), and the church fathers interpreted “today” as the day of eternity. This verse is quoted three times in the New Testament with reference to Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:5; 5:5).
It has been objected that the first of these, Acts 13:33, views Psalm 2:7 as fulfilled in the resurrection of Christ, and therefore the “begetting” cannot be a reference to the pretemporal, eternal generation of the Son. But according to the uniform teaching of the New Testament, the resurrection of Christ was not the moment when He became the Son. The Gospels are clear that He already was called the Son at least from the time of His baptism (see Mark 1:11, echoing Psalm 2:7). It is better to interpret Acts 13:33 as teaching that, by His resurrection, Christ was “declared to be the Son of God in power” (Rom. 1:4 ESV, emphasis added).
The two citations of Psalm 2:7 in Hebrews 1:5 and 5:5 are clearer. The author of Hebrews gives clues in the immediate context that he understands Psalm 2:7 to be speaking of the Son’s generation as occurring before God “brings the firstborn into the world” (Heb. 1:6) and prior to “the days of his flesh” (Heb. 5:7).
Another important Old Testament text that the church fathers relied on to support the notion that the Son is begotten of the Father is Psalm 110:3 (109:3 LXX). As rendered in the Old Greek, the verse reads, “From the womb, before the morning star, I begat you” (translation mine). The church fathers read the Old Testament in Greek translation, so they saw the word “begat” there and applied it to Christ.4 This was perfectly natural, since the immediate context is the famous Psalm 110:1, quoted or alluded to at least twenty-two times in the New Testament concerning the exaltation of Christ: “The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet’” (Ps. 110:1, translation mine). Since Jesus and the New Testament writers clearly interpret this psalm as a prophecy of the exaltation of Christ to the right hand of God, the church fathers felt it was appropriate to take verse 3, which is in the past tense (“I begat you”) and therefore prior to His exaltation, as a reference to the pre-incarnate begetting of Christ. This was reinforced by the language, “From the womb, before the morning star,” which was taken as a reference to the time prior to creation (Job 38:7) when the Son was “in the Father’s bosom” (John 1:18).
The church fathers also quoted Proverbs 8:25 frequently in the Old Greek, which has the figure of Wisdom saying, “Before the mountains were created, before all the hills, he begets me” (translation mine). The church fathers believed the figure of Wisdom in this passage was the pre-incarnate Christ. This was based on two considerations: (1) the New Testament refers to Jesus as God’s Wisdom (Matt. 11:19; 1 Cor. 1:24, 30; Col. 2:3); and (2) Wisdom is pictured in Proverbs 8:22–31 as being present with God as His “master workman” at the beginning, which fits with the New Testament teaching that the Word was with God “in the beginning” (John 1:1–2) as the intermediary of creation (John 1:3; 1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2).
The New Testament Evidence
When we turn to the New Testament texts that the church fathers appealed to, we find that a favorite was Hebrews 1:3, which describes the Son as “the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature” (ESV). This verse does not use the language of begetting but it implies that the Son is derived from God, just as radiance is derived from light, while still being light. If the Father is light, so is the Son. Furthermore, they argued that just as the light is never without its radiance, so the Father was never without His Son. “The Son is the begotten light who has shone forth from the unbegotten light.”5 This important verse is the basis of the Nicene Creed’s affirmation that the Son is “Light of Light.”
Another group of texts that the church fathers used is Matthew 11:27 (“All things have been handed over to me by my Father,” ESV), and John 16:15 (“All that belongs to the Father is mine,” NIV). They were obviously attracted to these verses because of the emphatic “all.” Athanasius argued that if the Father has everlastingness, eternality, and immortality, and if the Father has given “all” that He has to the Son, then the Son must possess these attributes as well, and He must possess them eternally, otherwise He would not really possess everlastingness, eternality, and immortality.6 Similarly, in John 5:26, Jesus says, “As the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself” (ESV). These verses affirm that the Father puts the Son in full possession of His own divine nature. Indeed, the great expository preacher Chrysostom argued that the verb “has given” in these contexts is tantamount to “has begotten.”7
Finally, we must consider the five references in the Johannine literature to Jesus as “the only begotten” Son of God (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). The Greek word traditionally rendered “only begotten” is monogenēs. The consensus of modern scholarship rejects this translation and argues that it just means “unique” or “only,” without any notion of “begotten.” That was not how the church fathers interpreted the word, however, and there are good lexicographical arguments for the traditional rendering.8
The church fathers were interested particularly in the two occurrences of this word in the prologue of John’s Gospel. John opens his Gospel by describing who Jesus Christ was before He became incarnate: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God” (John 1:1–2 ESV). We then come to our first occurrence of the key word monogenēs: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the Only Begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14, translation mine). The church fathers interpreted John as teaching that “the Word” (the Son before creation and before He “became flesh”) and “the Only Begotten from the Father” are the same. Additionally, the church fathers, taking their cue from this verse, often referred to the Son as “the Only Begotten,” as the peculiar identifying designation of the Son. When using this title, they clearly didn’t mean “the Unique One,” because that name would not be a peculiar designation of the Son, since the Father and the Spirit are also unique.
A few verses after John 1:14, we come to verse 18, which reads, “No one has ever seen God; the only begotten God (or Son), who is in the Father’s bosom, he has made him known” (translation mine). The manuscript tradition is divided pretty evenly between “the only begotten God” and “the only begotten Son,” and the church fathers quoted it both ways. But what is interesting is the first variant, “the only begotten God.” The ESV translates this “the only God,” but that can’t be right, since it would imply either that Jesus is the only God (leaving the Father and the Spirit outside of the Godhead) or it would imply modalism, both of which are denials of the Trinity. The church fathers understood that the Son is not the Father but rather the Father’s only begotten Son. Yet because He is eternally begotten of the Father, He shares the same divine nature as the Father and rightly can be called “the only begotten God.” As Irenaeus said, “The Father is God, and the Son is God, for whatever is begotten of God is God.”9
WHY ETERNAL GENERATION IS IMPORTANT
The doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son is important because it specifies what it means to say that Jesus is “the Son of God.” There is no question that this Christological title is doctrinally significant in the New Testament. To be sure, Jesus bears other doctrinally significant Christological titles, such as “Lord,” “Christ,” and “Son of Man.” But the title “Son” carries special theological significance due to its frequency and its close connection with the preexistence of Christ. Many of the other titles designate the messianic office of Christ as man.
But “Son” goes back before His incarnation to describe who He is ontologically and eternally. But what exactly does the title “Son of God” signify? Some say it is merely a messianic title, based on its usage in the Old Testament with reference to the Davidic king (2 Sam. 7:14). This isn’t a satisfying interpretation, given Jesus’ own teaching in the Gospels that His being God’s Son makes Him far more than David’s son (Matt. 22:41–46). Perhaps the title “Son” is intended to emphasize the relationship between the Father and the Son. Some say it focuses on the intimacy and love between the Father and the Son. Others say it focuses on a relationship of authority and submission. Just as sons were expected to submit to and obey the authority of their fathers in the ancient world, so the pre-incarnate Son eternally submits to and obeys the Father.13 But it is more appropriate to reserve such language to the incarnate Son who perfectly obeyed His Father’s will, even to the point of death.
What exactly is being affirmed when the New Testament calls Christ “the Son of God”? It is here that the notion that the Father eternally begets the Son comes into its own. Since the Scriptures not only affirm that Jesus is the Son of God but also states that He is “the only begotten Son of God,” we can be sure that we are on the right track in determining what is meant by referring to Him as “Son.” The precise point of the metaphor is that when a father begets a son, he imparts his own nature to the son. The son of a human father is fully human, not a mere primate or some other creature. The doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son therefore specifies that the Son shares the same divine nature as the Father, or as the Nicene Creed puts it, “Begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father.” The Son is not a creature made by God, but the very Son of God. Thus, the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son is important because it grounds the full deity of Christ.
The doctrine is important also because it is the linchpin of the doctrine of the Trinity. The classical doctrine of the Trinity states that within the one, undivided nature of God, there are three persons — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The divine nature is not divided into three parts, nor are there three gods; rather, the divine nature is one, simple, and undivided. But there is personal differentiation within the one being of God. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Spirit is God, and there is only one God. Of course, this is a great mystery that we cannot fully comprehend, but Christians believe it is how God has revealed Himself, both in the economy of redemption (when the Father sent the Son and the Spirit) and in Scripture’s authoritative interpretation of these pivotal events. By sending His own Son in the flesh, and by giving the Holy Spirit, God has revealed Himself to be a tripersonal God.14
The Christian church in its classical doctrine of the Trinity is insistent on maintaining the unity of God, while at the same time affirming the full ontological deity and individual subsistence of the Son and the Spirit. But this raises a question. If the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not three gods, nor simply different modes of existence of the one God, but one God existing eternally in three persons, what distinguishes the three persons? And how can we identify those distinctions without compromising the undivided oneness of God? The answer is the doctrine of eternal generation. For on the one hand, the Father eternally generates or begets His own Son, who is not a creature separate from Himself and external to Himself but is the very reproduction of His own nature. Yet on the other hand, the Son is a distinct person. He is not the Father but the Father’s only begotten Son.
Of course, to flesh out a complete doctrine of the Trinity, we also would need to discuss the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father (John 15:26). But we can see how the same logic would apply. The eternal generation of the Son and the eternal procession of the Spirit enable us to see, however dimly, how there can be three distinct persons within the undivided being of God.
The church knows this is a great mystery, and so it must reverently submit to what the Scripture says, not going beyond Scripture into philosophical speculation. The classical formula, since the time of the fourth-century church fathers, has been that what distinguishes the three persons is their relations of origin: the Father is unbegotten, the Son is eternally begotten of the Father, and the Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father.15 These are the only safe distinctions because they are the only ones that have been revealed. Herein lies the clearest ground of the church’s belief that there is one God who exists eternally in three distinct and equally divine persons.
Charles Lee Irons, PhD, is an adjunct professor at California Graduate School of Theology. He maintains a website of biblical and theological studies at www.upperregister.com.
Peterlag
Active Member
You're write I don't read anything this long, but I do skim it. There really is no reason to keep reading about the same Scripture the trinity folks post since I see the same debates and the same Scripture 20 times a day. Since Jesus is not God is why there is not a verse anywhere that supports that he is. The verses that are used to try to teach it are all taken out of context, or not understood how the words were used in the culture they were written in, or from a bad translation. It's an evil Catholic concept that was sold to the world mostly by the power of the sword.What Trinitarians see is Psalm 2:7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
AND
John 1: 1 which you know, we all know.
affirming that Jesus is both fully divine and co-eternal with God the Father.
Now knowing that you will not read the following to the end, if you even start it... I suggest you take your argument directly
to the author Charles Lee Irons, PhD, is an adjunct professor at California Graduate School of Theology. He maintains a website of biblical and theological studies at www.upperregister.com.
I also did not copy all in hopes you will read what I post
And should you want more View attachment 2129 View attachment 2130 The full text of this article in PDF format can be obtained by clicking here. (Do so in the link)For further information about to the CHRISTIAN RESEARCH JOURNAL go to: http://www.equip.org/christian-research-journal/
Begotten of the Father before All Ages: The Biblical Basis of Eternal Generation according to the Church Fathers
Author:
Charles Lee Irons
•
This article first appeared in the CHRISTIAN RESEARCH JOURNAL, volume 40, number 01 (2017). The full text of this article in PDF format can be obtained by clicking here. For further information about to the CHRISTIAN RESEARCH JOURNAL go to: http://www.equip.org/christian-research-journal/
SYNOPSIS
The purpose of this essay is to understand the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son. Eternal generation is not a philosophical speculation, nor a theological deduction, but an exegetically grounded doctrine. The church fathers appealed to several biblical texts in both the Old and New Testament in support of their conviction that the Son is eternally begotten of the Father. The concept of begetting is a metaphor drawn from the embodied experience of human fathers begetting human sons. This doctrine is important because it is crucial to defending the full deity of the Son, and it is the linchpin of the classical doctrine of the Trinity.
Throughout the fourth century, the church fathers1 were engaged in a bitter debate with Arianism, and it was within the context of that debate that they clarified the church’s doctrine of the Trinity. Arianism was the view that the Son is a subdeity who did not always exist but was created by God as the first and most glorious being in the universe, “the firstborn of all creation.” Arians affirmed the preexistence of Christ — He existed as the Logos before His virgin birth. But they denied the eternal preexistence of Christ. They said there was a time when He did not exist, and that before His generation, He did not exist. They said He was created out of the things that do not exist. Although He is the most glorious and first creature made by God, and can even be called “God” in some sense because of His exalted honor and divine glory, He falls on the creature side of the Creator-creature distinction.
In response, the church fathers appealed to the scriptural teaching that the Son is not a creature external to God but is the eternal offspring of the Father and proper to the very essence of God. As the bishops confessed at the first ecumenical council at Nicaea (325), the church believes “in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father only-begotten, that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father”2 (emphasis added). The contrast “begotten, not made” is a broadside against Arianism. As Athanasius put it, “The Son is other than things originate [i.e., created], alone the proper offspring of the Father’s essence.”3 The church fathers saw a massive distinction between a creature made by God and an offspring eternally begotten of God.
THE BIBLICAL BASIS OF ETERNAL GENERATION
The doctrine of the eternal generation or begetting of the Son was not concocted by means of philosophical speculation. Nor was it primarily a theological deduction from the correlative names “Father” and “Son.” Rather, the Son’s personal property of being eternally begotten of the Father was grounded in the explicit teaching of Scripture. The church fathers appealed to a number of verses in both the New Testament and the Old Testament (interpreted in light of the New), which they read as teaching that the Son is “begotten, not made.” Let’s review some of these key passages.
The Old Testament Evidence
The first Old Testament text cited by the church fathers is Psalm 2:7, which says, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you” (ESV), and the church fathers interpreted “today” as the day of eternity. This verse is quoted three times in the New Testament with reference to Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:5; 5:5).
It has been objected that the first of these, Acts 13:33, views Psalm 2:7 as fulfilled in the resurrection of Christ, and therefore the “begetting” cannot be a reference to the pretemporal, eternal generation of the Son. But according to the uniform teaching of the New Testament, the resurrection of Christ was not the moment when He became the Son. The Gospels are clear that He already was called the Son at least from the time of His baptism (see Mark 1:11, echoing Psalm 2:7). It is better to interpret Acts 13:33 as teaching that, by His resurrection, Christ was “declared to be the Son of God in power” (Rom. 1:4 ESV, emphasis added).
The two citations of Psalm 2:7 in Hebrews 1:5 and 5:5 are clearer. The author of Hebrews gives clues in the immediate context that he understands Psalm 2:7 to be speaking of the Son’s generation as occurring before God “brings the firstborn into the world” (Heb. 1:6) and prior to “the days of his flesh” (Heb. 5:7).
Another important Old Testament text that the church fathers relied on to support the notion that the Son is begotten of the Father is Psalm 110:3 (109:3 LXX). As rendered in the Old Greek, the verse reads, “From the womb, before the morning star, I begat you” (translation mine). The church fathers read the Old Testament in Greek translation, so they saw the word “begat” there and applied it to Christ.4 This was perfectly natural, since the immediate context is the famous Psalm 110:1, quoted or alluded to at least twenty-two times in the New Testament concerning the exaltation of Christ: “The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet’” (Ps. 110:1, translation mine). Since Jesus and the New Testament writers clearly interpret this psalm as a prophecy of the exaltation of Christ to the right hand of God, the church fathers felt it was appropriate to take verse 3, which is in the past tense (“I begat you”) and therefore prior to His exaltation, as a reference to the pre-incarnate begetting of Christ. This was reinforced by the language, “From the womb, before the morning star,” which was taken as a reference to the time prior to creation (Job 38:7) when the Son was “in the Father’s bosom” (John 1:18).
The church fathers also quoted Proverbs 8:25 frequently in the Old Greek, which has the figure of Wisdom saying, “Before the mountains were created, before all the hills, he begets me” (translation mine). The church fathers believed the figure of Wisdom in this passage was the pre-incarnate Christ. This was based on two considerations: (1) the New Testament refers to Jesus as God’s Wisdom (Matt. 11:19; 1 Cor. 1:24, 30; Col. 2:3); and (2) Wisdom is pictured in Proverbs 8:22–31 as being present with God as His “master workman” at the beginning, which fits with the New Testament teaching that the Word was with God “in the beginning” (John 1:1–2) as the intermediary of creation (John 1:3; 1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2).
The New Testament Evidence
When we turn to the New Testament texts that the church fathers appealed to, we find that a favorite was Hebrews 1:3, which describes the Son as “the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature” (ESV). This verse does not use the language of begetting but it implies that the Son is derived from God, just as radiance is derived from light, while still being light. If the Father is light, so is the Son. Furthermore, they argued that just as the light is never without its radiance, so the Father was never without His Son. “The Son is the begotten light who has shone forth from the unbegotten light.”5 This important verse is the basis of the Nicene Creed’s affirmation that the Son is “Light of Light.”
Another group of texts that the church fathers used is Matthew 11:27 (“All things have been handed over to me by my Father,” ESV), and John 16:15 (“All that belongs to the Father is mine,” NIV). They were obviously attracted to these verses because of the emphatic “all.” Athanasius argued that if the Father has everlastingness, eternality, and immortality, and if the Father has given “all” that He has to the Son, then the Son must possess these attributes as well, and He must possess them eternally, otherwise He would not really possess everlastingness, eternality, and immortality.6 Similarly, in John 5:26, Jesus says, “As the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself” (ESV). These verses affirm that the Father puts the Son in full possession of His own divine nature. Indeed, the great expository preacher Chrysostom argued that the verb “has given” in these contexts is tantamount to “has begotten.”7
Finally, we must consider the five references in the Johannine literature to Jesus as “the only begotten” Son of God (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). The Greek word traditionally rendered “only begotten” is monogenēs. The consensus of modern scholarship rejects this translation and argues that it just means “unique” or “only,” without any notion of “begotten.” That was not how the church fathers interpreted the word, however, and there are good lexicographical arguments for the traditional rendering.8
The church fathers were interested particularly in the two occurrences of this word in the prologue of John’s Gospel. John opens his Gospel by describing who Jesus Christ was before He became incarnate: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God” (John 1:1–2 ESV). We then come to our first occurrence of the key word monogenēs: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the Only Begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14, translation mine). The church fathers interpreted John as teaching that “the Word” (the Son before creation and before He “became flesh”) and “the Only Begotten from the Father” are the same. Additionally, the church fathers, taking their cue from this verse, often referred to the Son as “the Only Begotten,” as the peculiar identifying designation of the Son. When using this title, they clearly didn’t mean “the Unique One,” because that name would not be a peculiar designation of the Son, since the Father and the Spirit are also unique.
A few verses after John 1:14, we come to verse 18, which reads, “No one has ever seen God; the only begotten God (or Son), who is in the Father’s bosom, he has made him known” (translation mine). The manuscript tradition is divided pretty evenly between “the only begotten God” and “the only begotten Son,” and the church fathers quoted it both ways. But what is interesting is the first variant, “the only begotten God.” The ESV translates this “the only God,” but that can’t be right, since it would imply either that Jesus is the only God (leaving the Father and the Spirit outside of the Godhead) or it would imply modalism, both of which are denials of the Trinity. The church fathers understood that the Son is not the Father but rather the Father’s only begotten Son. Yet because He is eternally begotten of the Father, He shares the same divine nature as the Father and rightly can be called “the only begotten God.” As Irenaeus said, “The Father is God, and the Son is God, for whatever is begotten of God is God.”9
WHY ETERNAL GENERATION IS IMPORTANT
The doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son is important because it specifies what it means to say that Jesus is “the Son of God.” There is no question that this Christological title is doctrinally significant in the New Testament. To be sure, Jesus bears other doctrinally significant Christological titles, such as “Lord,” “Christ,” and “Son of Man.” But the title “Son” carries special theological significance due to its frequency and its close connection with the preexistence of Christ. Many of the other titles designate the messianic office of Christ as man.
But “Son” goes back before His incarnation to describe who He is ontologically and eternally. But what exactly does the title “Son of God” signify? Some say it is merely a messianic title, based on its usage in the Old Testament with reference to the Davidic king (2 Sam. 7:14). This isn’t a satisfying interpretation, given Jesus’ own teaching in the Gospels that His being God’s Son makes Him far more than David’s son (Matt. 22:41–46). Perhaps the title “Son” is intended to emphasize the relationship between the Father and the Son. Some say it focuses on the intimacy and love between the Father and the Son. Others say it focuses on a relationship of authority and submission. Just as sons were expected to submit to and obey the authority of their fathers in the ancient world, so the pre-incarnate Son eternally submits to and obeys the Father.13 But it is more appropriate to reserve such language to the incarnate Son who perfectly obeyed His Father’s will, even to the point of death.
What exactly is being affirmed when the New Testament calls Christ “the Son of God”? It is here that the notion that the Father eternally begets the Son comes into its own. Since the Scriptures not only affirm that Jesus is the Son of God but also states that He is “the only begotten Son of God,” we can be sure that we are on the right track in determining what is meant by referring to Him as “Son.” The precise point of the metaphor is that when a father begets a son, he imparts his own nature to the son. The son of a human father is fully human, not a mere primate or some other creature. The doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son therefore specifies that the Son shares the same divine nature as the Father, or as the Nicene Creed puts it, “Begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father.” The Son is not a creature made by God, but the very Son of God. Thus, the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son is important because it grounds the full deity of Christ.
The doctrine is important also because it is the linchpin of the doctrine of the Trinity. The classical doctrine of the Trinity states that within the one, undivided nature of God, there are three persons — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The divine nature is not divided into three parts, nor are there three gods; rather, the divine nature is one, simple, and undivided. But there is personal differentiation within the one being of God. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Spirit is God, and there is only one God. Of course, this is a great mystery that we cannot fully comprehend, but Christians believe it is how God has revealed Himself, both in the economy of redemption (when the Father sent the Son and the Spirit) and in Scripture’s authoritative interpretation of these pivotal events. By sending His own Son in the flesh, and by giving the Holy Spirit, God has revealed Himself to be a tripersonal God.14
The Christian church in its classical doctrine of the Trinity is insistent on maintaining the unity of God, while at the same time affirming the full ontological deity and individual subsistence of the Son and the Spirit. But this raises a question. If the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not three gods, nor simply different modes of existence of the one God, but one God existing eternally in three persons, what distinguishes the three persons? And how can we identify those distinctions without compromising the undivided oneness of God? The answer is the doctrine of eternal generation. For on the one hand, the Father eternally generates or begets His own Son, who is not a creature separate from Himself and external to Himself but is the very reproduction of His own nature. Yet on the other hand, the Son is a distinct person. He is not the Father but the Father’s only begotten Son.
Of course, to flesh out a complete doctrine of the Trinity, we also would need to discuss the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father (John 15:26). But we can see how the same logic would apply. The eternal generation of the Son and the eternal procession of the Spirit enable us to see, however dimly, how there can be three distinct persons within the undivided being of God.
The church knows this is a great mystery, and so it must reverently submit to what the Scripture says, not going beyond Scripture into philosophical speculation. The classical formula, since the time of the fourth-century church fathers, has been that what distinguishes the three persons is their relations of origin: the Father is unbegotten, the Son is eternally begotten of the Father, and the Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father.15 These are the only safe distinctions because they are the only ones that have been revealed. Herein lies the clearest ground of the church’s belief that there is one God who exists eternally in three distinct and equally divine persons.
Charles Lee Irons, PhD, is an adjunct professor at California Graduate School of Theology. He maintains a website of biblical and theological studies at www.upperregister.com.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
You wont read the following so I only posted a scant handful of those in the written word.
But now I do understand why you do not see things in the Bible.
You said..." You're write I don't read anything this long, but I do skim it."
YOU are skimming the Bible. That way you do not have to see and can deny.
Jesus claims it. THEY ARE ONE.
John 14:9
Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?What does this mean?
John 10:30-33
I and the Father are one.” The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?” The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.”John 1:18
No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.Colossians 2:9-10
For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority.I wont mention Heb 1:8 because you always deflect away from it or tell us it does not mean what it says. YOU ARE going to face God the Father some day and YOU ARE going to have to explain why you do not believe Him.
Who would this be if not God the Son?
Hebrews 1:3
He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.Matthew 1:23
“Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel” (which means, God with us).In Titus it . says this
Titus 2:13
Waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,1 Timothy 3:16
Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.
1 Cor. 10: 1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
Be careful that in your Zeal to promote your adopted religion, to become guilty of doing what you claim the Trinitarians are doing concerning the Scriptures which bring question to their religious philosophy.
John 17: 3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. 4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. 5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
John 6: 61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? 62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
John 8: 58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
Now I don't believe in the triune god promoted by the promoters of this world's religious system. I don't believe in the Catholic Trinity promoted by "Many" who call Jesus Lord, Lord, or her Sabbaths, or her High Days and religious marketing strategies, or her rejection of God's Judgments, that the Protestant reformation preserved and furthered when they broke away from her, and are furthering to this day.
But I do believe, based on what is actually written in Scriptures, that the Spirit of Christ which was in the Prophets of Old, and the mortal man Jesus, existed with His Father before all we know was created.
That doesn't make a trinitarian, or a unitarian or a JW. I simply means I believe "ALL" that is written in the Holy Scriptures.
Peterlag
Active Member
There's no Trinity. The verses that are used to try to teach it are all taken out of context, or not understood how the words were used in the culture they were written in, or from a bad translation. It's an evil Catholic concept that was sold to the world mostly by the power of the sword.
John 8:58
At the last super, the disciples were trying to find out who would deny the Christ. They said literally, "Not I am, Lord" Matthew 26:22, 25. No one would say the disciples were trying to deny they were God because they were using the phrase "Not I am." "I am" was a common way of designating oneself and it did not mean you were claiming to be God. The argument is made that because Jesus was "before" Abraham, Jesus must be God. Jesus figuratively existed in Abraham's time. He did not actually physically exist as a person, but rather he existed in the mind of God as God's plan for the redemption of man. In order for the Trinitarian argument that Jesus' "I am" statement in John 8:58 makes him God, his statement must be equivalent with God's "I am" statement in Exodus 3:14. The two statements are very different. The Greek phrase in John does mean "I am." The Hebrew phrase in Exodus means "to be" or "to become." God was saying "I will be what I will be."
Similar threads
