The Eternal Son.

[Origen]

@HankD
For clarification purposes I want to make sure I was clear. In post 156 you state:

In fact Constantinople Arians murdered the Trinitarians did they not.

To which I replied "As far as I know the answer is no" and asked for a primary source. I did not claim it never happened. I simply wanted a primary source to verity that particular event.

You also stated in that same post:

if i remember correctly the Trinitarians used the Johannine Comma of the old itala to prove Christs deity.

To which I responded "never happen." Again I to make sure you understood when I said it never happen I was referring only to your claim concerning the Comma.

I just want to make sure we are on the same page.

 

[HankD]

First that is not a primary source. Primary sources "are immediate, first-hand accounts of a topic, from people who had a direct connection with it. Second, no qualified historians of any kind are cited. Third, in fact no sources are named in order to check the veracity of the claims.

Only Robert G. Ingersoll is quoted and his quote is irrelevant to your claim.

That sites offers nothing that can support your claim. I will see what I can find on the matter when I have time.

OK but it does show there was violence in the controversy between Arians and Trinitarians.

 

[HankD]

@HankD
For clarification purposes I want to make sure I was clear. In post 156 you state:
To which I replied "As far as I know the answer is no" and asked for a primary source. I did not claim it never happened. I simply wanted a primary source to verity that particular event.

You also stated in that same post:
To which I responded "never happen." Again I to make sure you understood when I said it never happen I was referring only to your claim concerning the Comma.

I just want to make sure we are on the same page.

i have no doubt about the Comma Report. I dont have the paper I wrote (about 40 years ago) and I am not lying, i just cant prove it.

 

[Origen]

OK but it does show there was violence in the controversy between Arians and Trinitarians.

Again I do not claim it never happened but your source does not show it. It cites no credible source.

I am not lying

I never thought for a second you were lying.

 

[HankD]

Again I do not claim it never happened but your source does not show it. It cites no credible source.

I never thought for a second you were lying.

i'm looking.

 

[percho]

Did the virgin Mary give birth to the Son of the Most High? The Most High, what? Luke 1:32 Gen 14:22

Was, the Holy One, the Son of the Most High God, begotten or conceived of whatever the word, γεννηθὲν, means out of Spirit in the virgin Mary? Matt 1


Just for the record.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

no it it is not a game it is true.

Since you say it is true, not mere word games, we should give you another chance to explain why you differentiate between saying "distinct" and saying "different." From here, they appear to be a distinction without a difference.

Are you saying the Persons are not different but are distinct? If so, explain why. If not, you contradict yourself, or worse. Again, just to be clear, saying they are not different Persons sounds like saying they are the same Person.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Did the virgin Mary give birth to the Son of the Most High? The Most High, what? Luke 1:32 Gen 14:22

Was, the Holy One, the Son of the Most High God, begotten or conceived of whatever the word, γεννηθὲν, means out of Spirit in the virgin Mary? Matt 1

Just for the record.

For the record but without a point.

The question is not whether the Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God, for this is indisputable here. The question centers on the significance of this sonship.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

For the record but without a point.

The question is not whether the Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God, for this is indisputable here. The question centers on the significance of this sonship.

To make the issue more emphatic, are there any biblical references to anyone else being called son of God?

In the Luke 3 genealogy, the implication is certainly there in reference to Adam. We also find "sons of God" in the OT. Because there are such references, phrases such as "only begotten" and "unique" are critical for distinguishing who Jesus is as the Son of God.

 

[HankD]

Since you say it is true, not mere word games, we should give you another chance to explain why you differentiate between saying "distinct" and saying "different." From here, they appear to be a distinction without a difference.

Are you saying the Persons are not different but are distinct? If so, explain why. If not, you contradict yourself, or worse. Again, just to be clear, saying they are not different Persons sounds like saying they are the same Person.

It is the traditional way of addressing the members of the Trinity because they are not separate but one in essence.

"The doctrine of the Trinity means that there is one God who eternally exists as three distinct Persons — the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Stated differently, God is one in essence and three in person. These definitions express three crucial truths: (1) the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons, (2) each Person is fully God, (3) there is only one God.

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons. The Bible speaks of the Father as God (Philippians 1:2), Jesus as God (Titus 2:13), and the Holy Spirit as God (Acts 5:3–4). Are these just three different ways of looking at God, or simply ways of referring to three different roles that God plays? The answer must be no, because the Bible also indicates that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons."

"God is one in His essence, but this essence is shared fully and equally by three distinct persons. The Father is not “more God” than the Son, and the Son is not “more God” than the Spirit. We can distinguish the three persons, but we cannot separate them, for they are the one God. This is beyond our finite minds’ ability to fully comprehend, but that is no impediment to faith. What the Word tells us about God is true: He is one in essence and three in person."

Three Distinct Persons
What Is the Doctrine of the Trinity?

"The word Trinity cannot be found in the Bible, but the truth of it can. While there's only one God, the Godhead consists of three distinct persons - the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All are equally omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, eternal, and unchanging, but each one has unique functions."

The Roles of the Trinity?

"The Trinity consists of one being revealed in three distinct persons."

The Trinity

 

[37818]

no it it is not a game it is true.

Specifically what is true? What can never be true is to be begotten eternally. Which in ordinary meaning of those words is nonsense.

 

[Yeshua1]

Since you say it is true, not mere word games, we should give you another chance to explain why you differentiate between saying "distinct" and saying "different." From here, they appear to be a distinction without a difference.

Are you saying the Persons are not different but are distinct? If so, explain why. If not, you contradict yourself, or worse. Again, just to be clear, saying they are not different Persons sounds like saying they are the same Person.

Aren't the 3 persons of the Trinity distinct from each other, but all 3 still equally God?

 

[HankD]

Specifically what is true? What can never be true is to be begotten eternally. Which in ordinary meaning of those words is nonsense.

you haven't listened, so there's no need to pursue this anymore,

 

[Yeshua1]

To make the issue more emphatic, are there any biblical references to anyone else being called son of God?

In the Luke 3 genealogy, the implication is certainly there in reference to Adam. We also find "sons of God" in the OT. Because there are such references, phrases such as "only begotten" and "unique" are critical for distinguishing who Jesus is as the Son of God.

Only begotten Son of God, as He alone was eternally that, and not created nor adopted as all others had to be!

 

[Yeshua1]

Specifically what is true? What can never be true is to be begotten eternally. Which in ordinary meaning of those words is nonsense.

The Sun produces, generates both light and heat energy, were they not always there since the Sun was "turned on"

 

[HankD]

Aren't the 3 persons of the Trinity distinct from each other, but all 3 still equally God?

yes

 

[HankD]

Only begotten Son of God, as He alone was eternally that, and not created nor adopted as all others had to be!

true.

You and I are THE SONS OF GOD born of the Spirit. JESUS IS THE SON OF GOD BEGOTTEN OF the FATHER, He is the ONLY ONE ETERNALLY BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER. HE shares the FATHERS ESSENCE yet has a distinct persona as does the Holy Spirit.

i believe by faith that Jesus Christ is the eternal Son of God.

This is why the Creeds were developed because the church had slipped into Arianism (modalism).
Athanasius developed the doctrine of the Trinity, the council of Nicaea AD325 codified it.

Most of Christendom remains Arian and are not even aware of it.

 

[Yeshua1]

true.

You and I are THE SONS OF GOD born of the Spirit. JESUS IS THE SON OF GOD BEGOTTEN OF the FATHER, He is the ONLY ONE ETERNALLY BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER. HE shares the FATHERS ESSENCE yet has a distinct persona as does the Holy Spirit.

i believe by faith that Jesus Christ is the eternal Son of God.

This is why the Creeds were developed because the church had slipped into Arianism (modalism).
Athanasius developed the doctrine of the Trinity, the council of Nicaea AD325 codified it.

Most of Christendom remains Arian and are not even aware of it.

Many are function as holding to modalism....

 

[HankD]

Aren't the 3 persons of the Trinity distinct from each other, but all 3 still equally God?

Here is a summary of the traditional view of the eternal Sonship of Jesus Christ.

"The doctrine of eternal Sonship simply affirms that the second Person of the triune Godhead has eternally existed as the Son. In other words, there was never a time when He was not the Son of God, and there has always been a Father/Son relationship within the Godhead. This doctrine recognizes that the idea of Sonship is not merely a title or role that Christ assumed at some specific point in history, but that it is the essential identity of the second Person of the Godhead. According to this doctrine, Christ is and always has been the Son of God.

Yes, the eternal Sonship is biblical and is a view that is widely held among Christians and has been throughout church history. It is important, however, to remember when discussing the doctrine of eternal Sonship that there are evangelical Christians on both sides of this debate. This is not to say that this is not an important doctrine, because it is; it simply acknowledges the fact that there are orthodox or evangelical Christians that hold or have held both views. Those that deny the doctrine of eternal Sonship are not denying the triune nature of God or the deity or eternality of Christ, and those that embrace the eternal Sonship of Christ are not inferring that Jesus Christ was anything less than fully God.

Throughout church history the doctrine of eternal Sonship has been widely held, with most Christians believing that Jesus existed as God’s eternal Son before creation. It is affirmed in the Nicene Creed (325 A.D.) which states: "We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end." It was also later reaffirmed in the fifth century in the Athanasian Creed."

What is the doctrine of eternal Sonship and is it biblical? | GotQuestions.org

 

[Yeshua1]

Here is a summary of the traditional view of the eternal Sonship of Jesus Christ.

"The doctrine of eternal Sonship simply affirms that the second Person of the triune Godhead has eternally existed as the Son. In other words, there was never a time when He was not the Son of God, and there has always been a Father/Son relationship within the Godhead. This doctrine recognizes that the idea of Sonship is not merely a title or role that Christ assumed at some specific point in history, but that it is the essential identity of the second Person of the Godhead. According to this doctrine, Christ is and always has been the Son of God.

Yes, the eternal Sonship is biblical and is a view that is widely held among Christians and has been throughout church history. It is important, however, to remember when discussing the doctrine of eternal Sonship that there are evangelical Christians on both sides of this debate. This is not to say that this is not an important doctrine, because it is; it simply acknowledges the fact that there are orthodox or evangelical Christians that hold or have held both views. Those that deny the doctrine of eternal Sonship are not denying the triune nature of God or the deity or eternality of Christ, and those that embrace the eternal Sonship of Christ are not inferring that Jesus Christ was anything less than fully God.

Throughout church history the doctrine of eternal Sonship has been widely held, with most Christians believing that Jesus existed as God’s eternal Son before creation. It is affirmed in the Nicene Creed (325 A.D.) which states: "We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end." It was also later reaffirmed in the fifth century in the Athanasian Creed."

What is the doctrine of eternal Sonship and is it biblical? | GotQuestions.org

the Eternal Sonship view would be the prominent view, correct?