37818
Well-Known Member
We understand Trinity differently. Trinity refers to number Persons who were always the one and the same God. God is One per Deuteronomy 6:4.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Is the Doctrine of the Trinity wrong? (Eternal Generation/ eternally begotten)
- Thread starter JonC
- Start date
- Status
It is not divine subdivision. Eternal Generation is a part of the Doctrine of the Trinity and specifically includes "without division".
But you are right that Eternal Generation views the Word as eternally so.
Eternal Generation is God the Father sending the eternally existing God the Son (Logos) to be God incarnate.
Eternal Generation is the doctrine that God the Son (Logos, Word) existed eternally as the Logos instead of becoming so at the Incarnation.
37818
Well-Known Member
How He was, not who He was.
Wait.....now I don't get your disagreement again (I thought I had it).
Eternal Generation is the doctrine that the Word (Logos) is eternally Yahweh. At a point in time the Word became flesh (the "Son of Man"). BUT this did not change the Word, or the Trinity. The Son of God remains eternalky Yahweh.
What exactly is your objection?
Please link to "the Doctrine of the Trinity which specifically includes Eternal Generation without division.
My source specifically states it does claim division of the eternal essence as the "eternal generation."
The doctrine of eternal generation essentially teaches that God the Father eternally and by necessity generates or begets God the Son in such a way that the substance (the divine essence) of God is not divided. In other words, there is a communication of the whole, indivisible substance of the Godhead so that God the Son is the exact representation (or express image) of God the Father. There is still one divine essence that eternally exists in two persons through eternal generation. Reformed theologian Louis Berkhof states the doctrine of eternal generation in this way:
It is that eternal and necessary act of the first person in the Trinity, whereby He, within the divine Being, is the ground of a second personal subsistence like His own, and puts this second person in possession of the whole divine essence, without any division, alienation, or change (Systematic Theology, Eerdmans, 1938, p. 94).
It is that eternal and necessary act of the first person in the Trinity, whereby He, within the divine Being, is the ground of a second personal subsistence like His own, and puts this second person in possession of the whole divine essence, without any division, alienation, or change (Systematic Theology, Eerdmans, 1938, p. 94).
Thus the single Person (the Father) brought forth a previously non-existent Second Person. False doctrine.
Last edited:
But that how He was (the Word becoming flesh) is not the issue. We all believe that.
The issue is whether the Trinity changed (the relationship between the Persons of the Trinity changed).
You say yes. I say no. That is the difference.
I believe that the Word remained the Word (eternally comes forth from the Father, eternally is the "exact representation of the Father).
You don't.
37818
Well-Known Member
In my view it is not real.
37818
Well-Known Member
Eternal generation is like Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. Not real.
Just the title.
So far you have not presented one point that it is not true.
In fact, you repeatedly state the doctrine as your belief and then turn around and say the title is false.
It is easy to prove it is false, if it is.
Show where the Word does not eternally come forth from the Father.
But the issue is dividing the Person (God the Father) into more than one Person. What does generation mean if not an origination of something.
The doctrine is false.
No, that is not the issue at all.
In the doctrine "generation" means "coming forth". The idea is that the Son is eternal as the Word (comes forth from the Father). It is not about a beginning (hence "eternal") but roles.
Similarly it is said of the Spirit (eternal procession).
The doctrine seeks to distinguish that there are eternally three Persons.
The Father "spoke", all things came into being through the Word, and the Spirit moved upon the face of the waters.
Three distinct Persons.
But no dividing of Persons, no dividing of essence. One Eternal God.
So the doctrine means not eternal generation, but eternal non-generation. Got it. :
Sending forth the existing God the Son to be God incarnate is not eternal generation but temporal designation.
To repeat:
It is that eternal and necessary act of the first person in the Trinity, whereby He, within the divine Being, is the ground of a second personal subsistence like His own, and puts this second person in possession of the whole divine essence,
What is the status of this second person before He was put in possession of the whole divine essence?
The doctrine is false.
Lol....no. "Generation" in Eternal Generation means "coming forth".
What is the status of this second person before He was put in possession of the whole divine essence?
There was no "before He was put on possession of the whole divine essence".
He IS The Word (coming forth from the Father). Period. Eternally Yahweh.
Eternal Generation means that the Son of God is eternally the Word, "coming forth" from the Father, and eternally Yahweh (without change His divinity), and eternally the whole essence of God without division.
It's purpose was to prevent heresies that diminish His divinity or negate the Trinity.
As such, it simply presents truths of Scrioture about the topic without attempting to explain the "how".
Last edited:
37818
Well-Known Member
They are the same LORD{Yahweh} not two.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
Since we know that God does not change. And we know that God is LOVE 1Jn 4:8
There would have to be something, Son & Holy Spirit, for the Father to express love toward.
This would lend support to your view that the Trinity is Eternal and therefore the position or roles of the Father, Son, and Spirit are eternal.
One God (Yahweh). Three Persons.
Unless you are saying that One God just expresses Himself in 3 ways (that there are not actually three Persons in One God) then you have repeatedly affirmed Eternal Generation while rejecting the title for some odd reason.
37818
Well-Known Member
So some professing Trinitarians want to call the second Person of the Trinity "God the Son." Which is compatible with both Tritheism and Modalism.
No, it isn't comparable. It is actually accurate. Jesus did call Himself God's Son and He is God.
God even sent His Son into the World.
Tritheism is the belief in three gods.
Modalism is the belief that the Persons of the Trinity are not three distinct Persons.
Eternal Generation is a doctrine codified to prevent both errors.
Jesus is the Son of God, He is distinct from the Father and Spirit in Person, AND He is eternally YHWH.
That is the whole point of Eternal Generation
YHWH is unchanging and Eternal. The Word be coming flesh DID NOT change the nature of the Godhead. He IS eternal and immutable in nature.
But at the same time, the One True God is eternally three distinct Persons.
You have not yet provided even ONE point of disagreement with Eternal Generation.
I thought you did (I thought you held that the YHWH became a trinity). But it appears you affirm every point of Eternal Generation.
37818
Well-Known Member
I have. And you are in denial, in that you refuse actually understand my view. Which I had explained. And simply I am in denial of eternal generation even being Biblical. You have no Biblical text that actually teaches "eternal generation.".And have stated this before. And again here. And you have gone out of your way to disallow any view but yours.
- Status