Featured Common ground and points of disagreement.

No. I am saying you can't just say "The Gospel is defined in the NT" because that doesn't tell you anything.

 

Of course. But just saying "I believe the Bible" tells us nothing. What do you believe about it? What does it actually say? What does it actually mean? That's my point.

 

How are those statements unBiblical? Jesus is the only begotten Son of God. "Light from Light" - Jesus is the Light of the World (John 8:12). John the Baptist preached "baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" (Mark 1:4).

 

I think you are missing the point.

 

I think the problem arise as when we post what we believe and expect the brethren who read these OP's or posts expect us to believe just like they do... I will tell you what I believe, now some brethren are going to believe just like I do and some are not... This is just not here!... In all my tenure on here, it is not just here it is also in the body of believers you worship with, some will see things one way and some another... Each of us grow and mature as Christians and we add daily to what we already know but what I understand now should be greater than what I understood when I first joined the BB many years ago... We learn from each other not to change what we do know, although in our interaction with each other, change may come by something someone said that causes the change, as we look and examine it further may change our mind, to how we understood it before... Can I agree to disagree?... Do we hear what another brother says and examine where he is coming from?... We can bang scriptures together but if they don't harmonize, what purpose does it serve?... And no matter what we do, and how we interact with one another, our focus must always be centered on Jesus Christ... Brother Glen

2 Timothy 2:7 Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things.

 

They would be the so called Essentials of the Faith, as think RA Torrey had the Fundamentals of the Faith early Century

 

Seems like a matter of semantics. In the NASB, John 3:16 calls Jesus God's "only son", where the KJV says "only begotten son". "Eternally begotten" is an archaic way of saying He always was God's only begotten Son.

I really don't get the "light from light" point. Of course Jesus is the same God as the Father. The early Church fathers taught that. None of the creeds dispute the Trinity.

The "baptism" quote is often misunderstood. The Catholic church understands it to mean that baptism is required, but it is a quote from Mark's gospel. You and I agree on the proper interpretation.

If you don't want to use the early creeds as a summary of the key doctrines of your faith, that's your call. My main points were that 1) we need to recognize the difference between primary doctrines and doctrines of less importance; and 2) the early creeds provide a good example of primary doctrines.

 

Jesus was God the Son before assumed on Human flesh and is now God man!

 

Those who framed the wording in the Creeds were very specific to refute Arinian via their wording Only Begotten of the Father meant He was also fully God!

 

I firmly believe in the Eternal Sonship Of Jesus Christ and I know there are some on here who don't but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it, for those who don't... Brother Glen

 

We must go by what they held that being, as they were very clear was to point out Jesus was and is very God of very God!

 

Agreed, Jesus always was, and always will be, the true Light. I did a little research about the "light from light" phrase in the Nicean Creed. Here is what I found:

"It was at the Councils of Nicea and Constantinople that the true nature of Jesus was defended against a multitude of heresies. In particular, the words “God from God” and “Light from Light” were aimed against the Arian heresy, which denied the pre-existence of Christ. Arius (c. 250-336), a priest from Alexandria, argued that the Father alone is God in the full sense and that the Son was a being created by the Father. This idea was also called “subordinationism.” The Councils, drawing upon the traditions handed down to them from the Apostles, condemned the heresy and declared that Jesus was indeed both true God and true man. Against Arius, the Nicene Creed reasserts the principle that Jesus Christ is not made by God and so is of the created order, but is instead of the same order of being as the Father: uncreated, eternal, and timeless." This explanation does not contradict Scripture.

I agree that claiming that Scripture teaches something that it clearly does not is blasphemy. On the other hand, applying different interpretations of Scripture generally only happen with secondary issues. Scripture is very clear about foundational issues, and less clear on other doctrines.

We seem to be at odds over "begotten". I take that to refer to His incarnation when He was born to the Virgin Mary. Do you see this differently?

 

Arianians see this as if Jesus was begotten by and of the father, must had been created as father preexisted him, but Creed affirms both existed eternally in that Father Son dynamic!