Is Jesus Christ a created being (Begotten Son) or has He always existed alongside God the Father (Eternal Son)?

[Tenchi]

I firmly hold on to my particular Unitarian position.

What view you hold is ultimately God's business, not mine, of course. My responsibility as a child of God is only ever to speak the truth in love, not persuade or convince another person of the truth.

 

[Hopeful 2]

I consider this to be a personification, similar to the Wise Woman "Wisdom" of Proverbs 8 who was with the One God, Yahweh, God the Father in the Creation, as I stated earlier.

Did Wisdom take on flesh and be born of a virgin ?
The Word was with God from before there was time.
God and the Word were the "our" in Gen 1:26..."our image".
The Word was God and was with God, (John 1:1-5), until the Word put on skin and bones. (John 1:14)
The Word was as much an entity as God is.

 

[Free]

......................................................
If you truly just "glanced at" my study, that explains the great display of ignorance - again.

One of the main points of that study is the proven fact that (as in other languages) the exceptions must be known. The study strongly points out the exception of the influence of prepositions and genitives on the noun being examined.

Yes, the noun that is part of a prepositional phrase or is attached to a genitive may or may not use the article, BUT it does not always mean that noun is definite or indefinite. Please try reading the whole study carefully.

However, when the use of theos by John is not one of those affected by the known exceptions, it is always governed by the use or non-use of the article.

The study also shows the use of "god" in scriptures and a long list of trinitarian scholars who agree.

John 8:54 does use theos without the article. But as also pointed out in the studies, it is one of the exceptions ("God of you" - use of genitive) ! I believe you have pointed out this example before and you still refuse to examine what I have actually written. Of course I haven't changed it! Actually discuss what is written in the studies and comment on that.

John 20:28 is an entirely different subject. The article is used there and should be understood as needed. If you need another study of mine to mostly ignore and misuse here is John 20:28 - http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/10/mygod.html

Why do you expect people to read through your "studies" for such debates when it has likely taken you years to study and assemble them?

Some important things we need to understand are that Jesus 1) claimed several times to have preexisted with the Father and to have come down from heaven, 2) claimed to be the I Am of Ex 3:14-15, 3) accepted worship several times from his followers, without discouraging it, and 4) twice doesn't deny that he is equal to the Father when the charge is put to him.

On the basis of those things, at a minimum, his followers wrote certain things about him.

What we need to understand regarding John 1:1c is that 1) it is speaking of the Word being God in nature, 2) which is on the basis of both the absolute existence of the Word (1:1a) and the personhood of the Word having been in intimate relationship with God in that absolute existence (1:1b), 3) Yahweh himself says repeatedly, which is then repeated throughout the Bible, that he is the only God and there is no other god.

The conclusion of which is that John 1:1c cannot be translated as "a god," or it would contradict Scripture. From beginning to end, John's gospel is based on the identity of Jesus as found in John 1:1-18, and many things throughout support John's claim that Jesus is truly God and truly man (again, that is only because Jesus made the claims himself).

Paul then writes things about Jesus that clearly indicate he believed Jesus was God in human flesh, but not the Father, all the while upholding monotheism. Among those things include passages which are in full agreement with John 1:1-18. The writer of Hebrews then also writes things about Jesus that fully support what John and Paul wrote.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Fish153, tenchi, hopeful 2 and Free,

God calls himself THE KING OF ISRAEL. Nathanael calls Jesus THE KING OF ISRAEL after Jesus clearly shows divine attributes to him.

You failed to mention the Throne of David.

Jesus says he is "the origin and the offspring of David"

Jesus will be the source of life for David in the resurrection.

he says "Before Abraham was I AM".

I prefer the rendition "I am he", the same as John 8:24,28 in the immediate context. I recommend Tyndale's "I wilbe" and the rendition "I will be" in Exodus 3:12 in the immediate context, speaking of what God would do to deliver Israel out of Egypt and bring them into the Promised Land. It is not speaking about existence as explained by AB Davidson and many others.

Jesus clearly states he is God.

You would benefit by studying the range and meaning of the Hebrew word "Elohim" and a good place to start is John 10:30-36.

What view you hold is ultimately God's business, not mine, of course. My responsibility as a child of God is only ever to speak the truth in love, not persuade or convince another person of the truth.

Yes, but your assessment of the "truth" is different to mine. I am not sure that we will resolve this difference.

Did Wisdom take on flesh and be born of a virgin ?

Yes, Jesus is the epitonomy of Wisdom.

The Word was with God from before there was time.

So was the Wise Woman Wisdom.

God and the Word were the "our" in Gen 1:26..."our image".

The One God, Yahweh, God the Father is inviting the Angels to participate in creating man in their image and likeness Psalm 8:5.

The Word was God and was with God, (John 1:1-5), until the Word put on skin and bones. (John 1:14)
The Word was as much an entity as God is.

The Word is one of God's attributes, just as is His Wisdom, His love, His mercy.

Yahweh himself says repeatedly, which is then repeated throughout the Bible, that he is the only God and there is no other god.

Yes, Jesus is the Son of God. JW's have a wrong translation of John 1:1, based at first on their misunderstanding of their Diaglott, or rather Benjamin Wilson's Diaglott.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[LeviR]

Greetings again Fish153, tenchi, hopeful 2 and Free,

You failed to mention the Throne of David.

Jesus will be the source of life for David in the resurrection.

I prefer the rendition "I am he", the same as John 8:24,28 in the immediate context. I recommend Tyndale's "I wilbe" and the rendition "I will be" in Exodus 3:12 in the immediate context, speaking of what God would do to deliver Israel out of Egypt and bring them into the Promised Land. It is not speaking about existence as explained by AB Davidson and many others.

You would benefit by studying the range and meaning of the Hebrew word "Elohim" and a good place to start is John 10:30-36.

Yes, but your assessment of the "truth" is different to mine. I am not sure that we will resolve this difference.

Yes, Jesus is the epitonomy of Wisdom.

So was the Wise Woman Wisdom.

The One God, Yahweh, God the Father is inviting the Angels to participate in creating man in their image and likeness Psalm 8:5.

The Word is one of God's attributes, just as is His Wisdom, His love, His mercy.

Yes, Jesus is the Son of God. JW's have a wrong translation of John 1:1, based at first on their misunderstanding of their Diaglott, or rather Benjamin Wilson's Diaglott.

Kind regards
Trevor

The word is not “origin” Of David. It is “root” of David.
The root comes from the seed.
He is the root and offspring from the seed of David.
IOW, Jesus was a Jewish man in the line of his father David.

 

[Tenchi]

Yes, but your assessment of the "truth" is different to mine. I am not sure that we will resolve this difference.

Not because the truth about God's nature isn't plain, however. The trinitarian view of God is well-established in Scripture which is why it has been the orthodox understanding of God held by a great many Christians for a very long time. The truth, then, about God's nature isn't relative to the individual, conforming to their preferences or capacity to reason, but objective and clearly indicated in God's word, the Bible. If we don't agree, it is because one of us is wrong, or neither of us is.

 

[Fish153]

What view you hold is ultimately God's business, not mine, of course. My responsibility as a child of God is only ever to speak the truth in love, not persuade or convince another person of the truth.

"Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
"But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
"As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1: 7-9)

I'm not so sure of that Tenchi. If someone is teaching outright heresy we do need to "persuade" them of their error. God alone can change their hearts. But God takes heresy quite seriously as Paul demonstrates so clearly above.

 

[Tenchi]

I'm not so sure of that Tenchi. If someone is teaching outright heresy we do need to "persuade" them of their error.

What you'll come to understand (if you don't yet understand it) is that you haven't the power to persuade anyone of anything unless they are already prepared to be persuaded. So, you can challenge error, but you can't make the one holding that error forsake it. Typically, a person who has been investing repeatedly in their error by defending and promoting it is especially hardened by doing so against being persuaded to a different, correct view. This increasing hardness to the truth is, I think, part of how God judges the purveyor of falsehood.

 

[LeviR]

What you'll come to understand (if you don't yet understand it) is that you haven't the power to persuade anyone of anything unless they are already prepared to be persuaded. So, you can challenge error, but you can't make the one holding that error forsake it. Typically, a person who has been investing repeatedly in their error by defending and promoting it is especially hardened by doing so against being persuaded to a different, correct view. This increasing hardness to the truth is, I think, part of how God judges the purveyor of falsehood.

It boils down to what’s reasonable and what’s not.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Yes, Jesus is the epitonomy of Wisdom.

But that isn't written in scripture like the Word's putting on flesh was..."And 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." (John 1:14)

So was the Wise Woman Wisdom.

You have granted life to a simile/metaphor.

The One God, Yahweh, God the Father is inviting the Angels to participate in creating man in their image and likeness Psalm 8:5.

No, He isn't.
The Word was with God, and it was their image that was copied when man was created.
You are misattributing creation to angels.

The Word is one of God's attributes, just as is His Wisdom, His love, His mercy.

Got a scripture claiming the Word was a mere attribute of God ?

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again LeviR, Tenchi, Fish153 and Hopeful 2,

The word is not “origin” Of David. It is “root” of David.

That is interesting. I had always taken this in the other sense which also conforms to the Unitarian view. I will need to consider this, using some of my word reference books.

Not because the truth about God's nature isn't plain, however.

I have no problem with God's nature, but I believe that Jesus was a man with human nature.

Hebrews 2:14 (KJV): Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

Romans 8:3 (KJV): For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful (sin's) flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

1 John 4:1–3 (KJV): 1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

If we don't agree, it is because one of us is wrong, or neither of us is.

I would be interested in where you draw the line in some of this development from the original Apostolic Gospel. Do you fully endorse the Athanasian Creed or even go further if you are a Catholic, with the exaltation and worship of Mary?

God takes heresy quite seriously as Paul demonstrates so clearly above.

Yes.

No, He isn't. You are misattributing creation to angels.

Psalm 8:5 is David's commentary/summary of Genesis 1:26-27.
Psalm 8:5 (KJV): For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels (Hebrew Elohim). and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

Got a scripture claiming the Word was a mere attribute of God ?

Isaiah 55:8–11 (KJV): 8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. 10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: 11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[LeviR]

Greetings again LeviR, Tenchi, Fish153 and Hopeful 2,

That is interesting. I had always taken this in the other sense which also conforms to the Unitarian view. I will need to consider this, using some of my word reference books.

I have no problem with God's nature, but I believe that Jesus was a man with human nature.

Hebrews 2:14 (KJV): Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

Romans 8:3 (KJV): For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful (sin's) flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

1 John 4:1–3 (KJV): 1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

I would be interested in where you draw the line in some of this development from the original Apostolic Gospel. Do you fully endorse the Athanasian Creed or even go further if you are a Catholic, with the exaltation and worship of Mary?

Yes.

Psalm 8:5 is David's commentary/summary of Genesis 1:26-27.
Psalm 8:5 (KJV): For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels (Hebrew Elohim). and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

Isaiah 55:8–11 (KJV): 8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. 10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: 11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Kind regards
Trevor

Let me know what you find. I guarantee the word “root” does not mean “origin”.
Since when does a root produce the seed?
Never, the seed produces the root.

Using the word “origin” for “root” is just another twisting of the truth.

I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star.”(NKJV)


I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this message for the churches. I am both the source of David and the heir to his throne.[fn] I am the bright morning star.” (NLT)

 

[LeviR]

TrevorL

To say “the love of money is the root of all evil” is to say that from evil springs(shoots) the love for wealth and material gain.

To say the love of money produces evil, is to twist the truth. Evil produces the love for more than you need.

 

[Randy]

The Deity that was pleased to dwell IN Him is unbegotten. His spirit is the beginning of the creation of God. God's Firstborn and the Firstborn of all creation. He is before all things except His God and Father. And God the Father brought all those things He is before through, by and for Him. The Father is in Him and He in the Father and they are ONE. The external life in the Son is the Fathers Deity. The Son has the Fathers very nature in Him. One God from whom all things came and One Lord through whom all things came.

The Son who was, His spirit, was in the body prepared for Him and as we read the Father was living in Him and they are ONE.

 

[LeviR]

The Deity that was pleased to dwell IN Him is unbegotten. His spirit is the beginning of the creation of God. God's Firstborn and the Firstborn of all creation. He is before all things except His God and Father. And God the Father brought all those things He is before through, by and for Him. The Father is in Him and He in the Father and they are ONE. The external life in the Son is the Fathers Deity. The Son has the Fathers very nature in Him. One God from whom all things came and One Lord through whom all things came.

The Son who was, His spirit, was in the body prepared for Him and as we read the Father was living in Him and they are ONE.

The Deity that was pleased to dwell in him is the Spirit of the Father .
It is by the Spirit of the Father he has been given all power and authority over all of God’s creation.
One who already is that Spirit is not given that Spirit. One who already has all power and authority is not given it.

 

[Tenchi]

It boils down to what’s reasonable and what’s not.

One man's reasonableness is another man's stupidity. I wish I could trust these days that, generally, people knew how to reason well. But, this is most definitely not the case. In fact, there seems to be a cultural trend in the opposite direction, into profound dullness of mind and ignorance of basic features of thinking well.

 

[LeviR]

One man's reasonableness is another man's stupidity. I wish I could trust these days that, generally, people knew how to reason well. But, this is most definitely not the case. In fact, there seems to be a cultural trend in the opposite direction, into profound dullness of mind and ignorance of basic features of thinking well.

In him was life. He produces all life. Life comes from him.

If this is true of him, then to be given to him to have life within himself, contradicts the first idea because the life within him is given to him from another.

So let’s be reasonable.

 

[Tenchi]

In him was life. He produces all life. Life comes from him.

If this is true of him, then to be given to him to have life within himself, contradicts the first idea because the life within him is given to him from another.

So let’s be reasonable.

As I pointed out in my first post to this thread, the argument is, for me, even simpler. Those who want to say that by "begotten" Scripture means to say that Jesus was created rather than merely preeminent, as Colossians 1:15-19 makes clear, cannot escape the following syllogism and its conclusion:

1. God is, by definition, without beginning or end.
2. Jesus had a beginning.
3. Therefore, Jesus is not God.

Any person who suggests Jesus was a created being, by which they must mean "Not God" is, as far as I'm concerned, not only denying the plain declaration of Scripture, but in doing so revealing the spirit of anti-Christ within themselves.

 

[LeviR]

As I pointed out in my first post to this thread, the argument is, for me, even simpler. Those who want to say that by "begotten" Scripture means to say that Jesus was created rather than merely preeminent, as Colossians 1:15-19 makes clear, cannot escape the following syllogism and its conclusion:

1. God is, by definition, without beginning or end.
2. Jesus had a beginning.
3. Therefore, Jesus is not God.

Any person who suggests Jesus was a created being, by which they must mean "Not God" is, as far as I'm concerned, not only denying the plain declaration of Scripture, but in doing so revealing the spirit of anti-Christ within themselves.

1 God is, by definition, without beginning or end.
2. Jesus had a beginning.
3. Jesus carries the name of God in him.
4. Jesus is God.
5. Jesus has a God.
6. Jesus is not He alone who is God.
7. The God and Father of Jesus is alone the true God.

 

[LeviR]

1. God, by definition, has life within Himself.
2. Jesus was created and given life.
3. Jesus is given to have life within himself.
4. Jesus, by definition, is as He who has life within himself, God.