Only Begotten God?

Neither,Brian. My Bible tells me that he is God, not a SEPERATE GOD beggat in heaven(Arianisim).My Bible tells me(AV) that,in John 10:30 "I and my Father are ONE" Not 2 or 3 or whatever..ONE GOD, in a divine Godhead,the Trinity(1st John 5:7 AV.) Also, see Isaiah 44:6-8...AV, of course)

[ February 06, 2003, 10:15 PM: Message edited by: JYD ]

 

Yes, once again FFF shows off the biggest weapon in the KJV-only arsenal . . . mockery and changing the subject.

You gotta laugh.

* *

 

FFF said:

Note to Ransom: the New American Standard correctly translates monogenes it as only begotten.

Great! I have no problem affirming that Jesus Christ is begotten, and that Jesus Christ is God. I leave that to the KJV-onlyists.

 

Who cares about a language that has been dead for over 1800 years?? We have His word in the King's English... </font>[/QUOTE]So what you are saying is that it doesn't matter what God inspired only what you have arbitrarily decided to believe? If your KJVO beliefs are not based on evidence for the originals and it is not based on scripture then no matter how much fluff you pack on your belief boils down to an arbitrary opinion based on a sinful attitude.

 

Even if your arguments had substance, your attitude would still destroy your credibility. The character you demonstrate here does not reflect Christlikeness and shows an unloving attitude towards other believers. You shouldn't be proud of yourself but I suspect you are.

[ February 07, 2003, 05:51 PM: Message edited by: Scotty aka Scott J ]

 

Who cares about a language that has been dead for over 1800 years?? We have His word in the King's English... </font>[/QUOTE]Is your KJVOnlyism really this incoherent and inconsistent?

When asked for scriptural proof for KJVOnlyism (King's English would have been perfectly acceptable) in another thread, you responded:

So basically you are evading the truth aren't you?

 

I don't want to show you "what a great scholar I am." YOU are the one who claimed to know more about Greek (koine and modern) than I do and I asked you if you want to compare backgrounds. Apparently you deferred, perhaps because now you are not so sure about that ... Who knows???

It does. In reference to JEsus Christ, does the name "God" or the name "Son" more accurately communicate his deity?? IT is obvious that "God" is a clear title for deity while "son" is not a clear title of deity. The MVs, in this verse, are explicit on the deity of Christ. There is no room left for discussion. The KJV is not explicit. It's that simple.

I have preached 1 Tim 3:16 from the NASB. YOu should have been here. You would have seen very clearly that the NASB does not compromise the deity of Christ. IF you read the context, it is clear that Paul is talking about the church of the living God who was manifest in teh flesh. (That is the main idea of that part of his paragraph.) This verse is only a problem for those who don't read Scripture in its context.

JYD is the one who started the argument about big G and little g?? His statement was clearly false (which can be shown by merely looking at an MV. The MVs do not use a little G in John 1:18.

 

I am not sure I follow your question here. You asked about monogenes with reference to Isaac in HEb 11:17 and then ask about totally different words and contexts in reference to something totally different. What would you like an answer about?

 

Then can you explain why there is TWO Gods,in light of John 10:30??

 

Neither,Brian. My Bible tells me that he is God, not a SEPERATE GOD beggat in heaven(Arianisim).

</font>[/QUOTE]Where does the NIV or NASB say he is a "SEPARATE GOD"??? They don't. Nothing in John 1:18 requires a "separate" God interpretation.

So does the NIV and NASB.

JYD, the issue here is about "begotten God". Are you teaming up with the JWs too, saying it means one thing when the rest of mainline Christianity says it means another?

 

I am not talking about his flesh. I am talking about his Sonship. Does "begotten Son" mean his Sonship had a beginning? Please actually try to answer the question this time.

Yes, the heresy he is talking about is the one that says Christ's Sonship had a beginning. Do you subscribe to this heresy? Remember: if "begotten God" means his Godship had a beginning, then "begotten Son" means his Sonship had a beginning.

 

Then can you explain why there is TWO Gods,in light of John 10:30?? </font>[/QUOTE]There's nothing to explain. There is only one God.

 

Then can you explain why there is TWO Gods,in light of John 10:30?? </font>[/QUOTE]Can you explain why you think there are two Gods? I don't understand your reasoning here. JOhn 1:18 in the MVs say that the Word in flesh is the only God. THat means there are not two Gods. I don't know how much plainer it could be. Jesus Christ is not a second God; he is, according to the NIV, the one and only God. It is explicit. Do you accept this truth?

[ February 07, 2003, 10:42 AM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

 

If I have attacked someone personally instead of their arguments or instead of questioning their methods of argument then point me to them. I will edit them and apologize.

 

Do a search for member number 945 in the versions forum and you will find what I believe? If you find inconsistencies or have questions about why I believe as I do then please feel free to bring them to my attention.

 

FFF, please explain *how* John 1:18 (either the text as it stands, or via Pastor Larry's comments) justifies a 2 God belief.