Only Begotten God?

[AV Defender]

JYD, which do you have a problem with: that Jesus was "begotten", or that he is "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 ]

 

[Faith Fact Feeling]

Ooh. The eminent Pastor Larry wants to show me what a great scholar he is. I'm (not)impressed. I thought you said it only required common sense Larry??? Try preaching 1 Timothy 3:16 from your great Bible that, wait, hold on for this..."is so crystal clear that the Word made flesh was none other than God himself". What a joke.

Hey Brian, doesn't the Bible mention something about a distinction between the flesh and spirit? Didn't Christ's flesh on earth have a beginning?

Get'em JYD!!!!

Let me give you a heads-up about Brian's argument about Big G, little g. It's all about "guilt by association".

And Harold has uncovered a heresy. Way to go Harold. Interesting article.

[ February 06, 2003, 09:59 PM: Message edited by: Faith, Fact & Feeling ]

 

[Ransom]

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

You gotta laugh.

*

*

 

[Ransom]

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.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by JYD:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Really?? Wanna compare backgrounds?? Why don't you give your curricula vitae with regard to Greek.

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.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Faith, Fact & Feeling:
Ooh. The eminent Pastor Larry wants to show me what a great scholar he is. I'm (not)impressed. I thought you said it only required common sense Larry??? Try preaching 1 Timothy 3:16 from your great Bible that, wait, hold on for this..."is so crystal clear that the Word made flesh was none other than God himself". What a joke.

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 ]

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by JYD:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Really?? Wanna compare backgrounds?? Why don't you give your curricula vitae with regard to Greek.

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:

There is none that I know of,it has to do with manuscript evedence and just plain common sense.

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

 

[Faith Fact Feeling]

Dear sweet Scotty is back. Thanks for the compliments, just don't turn around you might knock someone down with that beam in you eye.

Coming from someone of immense Christian charater like you that never uses personal attacks, that really hurts. Talk about arguments with substance, where's yours? Oh, and by the way, it was Larry who brought the "it's just common sense" reasoning to the thread, not JYD.

Ransom, I'm glad to see you know the maximum number of laughing icons is 8. Now, if you have something "intelligent" to add to the thread, please do so.

Could these sweet compliments be a sign you guys have nothing more of substance to add?

 

[Faith Fact Feeling]

Pastor Larry,

Given your exegesis of monogenes in Hebrews 11:17, how then do you reconcile "unique" with Hebrews 1:4-5, 5:5 and 1 John 5:18?

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by Faith, Fact & Feeling:
Ooh. The eminent Pastor Larry wants to show me what a great scholar he is. I'm (not)impressed.

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???

I thought you said it only required common sense Larry???

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.

Try preaching 1 Timothy 3:16 from your great Bible that, wait, hold on for this..."is so crystal clear that the Word made flesh was none other than God himself". What a joke.

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.

Let me give you a heads-up about Brian's argument about Big G, little g. It's all about "guilt by association".

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.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by Faith, Fact & Feeling:
Pastor Larry,

Given your exegesis of monogenes in Hebrews 11:17, how then do you reconcile "unique" with Hebrews 1:4-5, 5:5 and 1 John 5:18?

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?

 

[Anti-Alexandrian]

The MVs do not use a little G in John 1:18.

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

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by JYD:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> JYD, which do you have a problem with: that Jesus was "begotten", or that he is "God"?

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.

My Bible tells me(AV) that,in John 10:30 "I and my Father are ONE" Not 2 or 3 or whatever..ONE GOD,

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?

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by Faith, Fact & Feeling:

Hey Brian, doesn't the Bible mention something about a distinction between the flesh and spirit? Didn't Christ's flesh on earth have a beginning?

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.

And Harold has uncovered a heresy. Way to go Harold. Interesting article.

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.

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by MV-NEVER'ist:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> The MVs do not use a little G in John 1:18.

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.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by MV-NEVER'ist:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> The MVs do not use a little G in John 1:18.

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 ]

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Faith, Fact & Feeling:
Coming from someone of immense Christian charater like you that never uses personal attacks, that really hurts.

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.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Faith, Fact & Feeling:
Talk about arguments with substance, where's yours?

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.

 

[Faith Fact Feeling]

Your skirting the question Larry? You know I don't beleive in two Gods any more than you do. The point is that you are handling scripture in such a way as to create the justification of a 2 God belief with your "unique God" in John 1:18. Your objective in doing this is to justify theos in John 1:18 when this verse simply deals with incarnation. Address the references I gave you please.

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by Faith, Fact & Feeling:
Your skirting the question Larry? You know I don't beleive in two Gods any more than you do. The point is that you are handling scripture in such a way as to create the justification of a 2 God belief with your "unique God" in John 1:18. Your objective in doing this is to justify theos in John 1:18 when this verse simply deals with incarnation. Address the references I gave you please.

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