Featured The Eternal Son.

37, I’m leaning your way on this point, and find it a bit amusing that you are taking heat for wanting to develop a stronger biblical argument for what you believe. The Ps 45:6-7 passage sounds like a prophecy of the incarnate Christ in the context of his fellows and anointing. Not only that, but the kingdom seems a parallel to Daniel.

What would seem much more convincing to me, is the opening of Hebrews, which states, “In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe,” (Heb 1:1-2, NIV). That latter reference to the Son does sound pre-incarnate, tying in with the opening of John, the Logos who became flesh long after the creation of the world.

 

That is correct.

The physical form and setting aside the eternal glory for a short human span is not in question.

What I am not comfortable with is considering the Lord as the “son” prior to the taking of the physical and being born into that unique relationship.

 

Was he in, the region of the body extending from the breasts to the legs, ?

bosom - kolpos: 03788 the region of the body extending from the breasts to the legs, - Louw-Nida Lexicon _ From your previous post

 

no percho not literally, the language is metaphorical. It means Jesus/LOGOS comes forth from the Father's innermost being sharing HIS essence.

Because of the intimacy of this relationship He has eternally been known as The Son of God

 

these issues here at thE BB are the issues debated leading to the Council of Nicaea.

Trinitarian/homoousios
"Homoousios, in Christianity, the key term of the Christological doctrine formulated at the first ecumenical council at Nicaea in 325, to affirm that God the Son and God the Father are of the same substance. The definitive statement of orthodox belief, the Nicene Creed, contains the word homoousios.The First Council of Nicaea, presided over by the emperor Constantine, was convened to resolve the controversy within the church over the relationship between the persons of the Trinity. The council condemned Arianism, which taught that Christ was more than human but not fully divine. The use of homoousios (Greek: “of one substance”) in the creed produced at the council was meant to put an end to the controversy, although the influence of Arianism persisted in the church for centuries. In 381 Emperor Theodosius I summoned the second ecumenical council, the First Council of Constantinople, which developed and affirmed the earlier creed. The resulting Nicene Creed also contained the word homoousios and became the definitive statement of orthodox belief."

homoousios | Definition, History, & Importance

Unfortunately this discussion for the most part takes place in graduate courses in Christian theology.
Consequently and IMO much (maybe most) of Christendom is Modalist/Arian rather than Trinitarian.

 

Arians used a different word - homoiousios (look carefully at the spelling) to describe that relationship - "similar" substance rather than the "same". Christ substance is created rather than eternal.

"Homoiousios means "of similar substance," "of the similar essence." It was a term used in the fourth century by a heretical group to describe the relationship between the Father and the Son. This is an improper term to use when describing the relationship between the Father and the Son. They are not of similar essence. Rather, they are of the same essence (Homoousios). In other words, according to the correct doctrine of the Trinity, the Father and the Son (and the Holy Spirit) share the same essence. See Ontological Trinity."

Homoiousios | CARM.org

 

I dont think the Nicene Creed "promotes" this false teaching but might enable it due to the modern misunderstanding of the ENGLISH apparent meaning of "only begotten".

 

yes I believe you address the filioque controversy between the Latin and Greek church.

Ad Orientem: Eastern Rite Catholic's and the Filioque

 

God Himself defines and describes their relationship being the Father and the Son!

 

You seem to be always getting hung upon "only begotting", as that term refers to the Deity of Jesus, and not Him as a created being, ala JW!

 

those against that term always seem to think that it indicates being created being, but the framers of the Creed saw it as preserving Deity of Christ!

 

tha trefers to Jesus being eternally God!

 

That refers.........

 

Proverbs 30:4. 'Who has ascended into heaven, or descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has bound the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name, and what is His Son's name, if you know?'
The answer to the riddle was revealed by the Lord Jesus Christ as He preached Himself as the Messiah to Nicodemus.
John 3:13. "No one has ascended into heaven, but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven."

So the Lord Jesus Christ is the 'Son' referred to in the Proverbs text and it is He, the Son, who, as the Son, established all the ends of the earth (John 1:3; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:2.

 

excellent! Jesus also applied Son of Man to Himself as his favorite title, so saw Himself in sonship term to God!

 

that does not mean the Logos came into being before all ages but that He was begotten before all ages...

 

As Micah said, origin was from eternity past, from everlasting!