If you want to think Solomon is a type of son in this regard that is up to you. But, you know that Paul is not using "begotten" to refer to natural processes. He is speaking of resurrection. This is a completely non-natural event.
POLL: The Deity of Christ
- Thread starter p_rehbein
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
If you want to think Solomon is a type of son in this regard that is up to you. But, you know that Paul is not using "begotten" to refer to natural processes. He is speaking of resurrection. This is a completely non-natural event.
One view of Adoptionism is that He became the Son through adoption, which is silly based on the vagueness. One of the other Adoptionism views is that He became the Son of God at conception, and became God the Son at Ascention... or rather at His Resurrection, as the definition of "begotten" places it.
This still begs the question, what does it mean for Jesus to be "Son"? In what sense is he the Son of God?
Do you have any questions on post 492 before I continue with the next presentation?
Last edited:
That is something left out in Scripture.
But, the facts given are:
His Virgin Birth, through the Spirit,
His sinlessness,
His preaching,
His Resurrection,
and His Ascention.
There are sooo many verses tied in between. To be honest, I think the topic is beyond revelation. My true intent is not to create a new orthodox,
but to purify the old one that was taught to me, to make it more solid upon what is revealed, and less dependent upon logical patterns and inferences.
To do this, doubt of man's theologies of God is needed.
If one trusts man's thoughts of God, then they are going to misstep or overreach.
One must be skeptical of man's thoughts, and accepting/sensitive to God's Word.
If one trusts man's thoughts of God, then they are going to misstep or overreach.
One must be skeptical of man's thoughts, and accepting/sensitive to God's Word.
I have no doubt that you can form a convincing valid proof of the Trinity using Scripture, or else no one would believe such a thing;
but my doubt is in the USEFULNESS of such a doctrine, in light of the usefulness of the Gospel by itself.
but my doubt is in the USEFULNESS of such a doctrine, in light of the usefulness of the Gospel by itself.
I am realizing that this thread is a poor medium to debate such things, as we both agree upon the Deity of Christ, but simply are questioning each other over the details that we use to come to it.
Well, I would not say it is left out. There is a reason Jesus is always referred to as the υἱὸν and never the νήπιος, παιδίον, or τέκνον when it speaks of his sonship.
Well now you have peaked (I know it is supposed to be spelled differently in this context) my interest.
Could you share the difference between these Greek terms?
(I could Google it, but that is so impersonal)
If you can wait until tomorrow. Sundays are always a really long day for me. I do hope you will continue our study. There is soooooo much more I have to show you. We haven't even gotten to the really good stuff yet.
I'm sure we are all eager to sit at the feet of the all-wise, all-knowing guru .............
S
senzi
Guest
S
senzi
Guest
The greatest power and most rapid growth of the christian church was seen before the emergence of the scholar and theologian, not after.
One wonders how the NT church survived and grew so rapidly, not having the benefit of all the theological understanding now available. But they did have the Holy Spirit, and relied totally on him
One wonders how the NT church survived and grew so rapidly, not having the benefit of all the theological understanding now available. But they did have the Holy Spirit, and relied totally on him
Perhaps you should try listening rather than mocking others. This is how a child behaves.
Perhaps I'm on the right track ....
"Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein."
Perhaps anyone who says "There is soooooo much more I have to show you"
could use a little humility ?
νήπιος and παιδίον both refer to an infant or a child irrespective of age. Metaphorically it refers to one who is unlearned or unenlightened. Even when Jesus was a child he was never referred to as the νήπιος or παιδίον θεοῦ.
τέκνον refers to one who is a child as one who is a descendent. Jesus is never referred to as a τέκνον or descendent of God.
υἱὸν can imply descendency as in one who is an offspring but more appropriately it emphasizes likeness of character, nature, form or behavior. It also signifies one who has the legal right to the Father's inheritance.We can see examples of υἱὸν used to define the nature, actions, form, or character of a person such as Mark 3:17 where Jesus calls James and John “sons - υἱοὶ - of thunder;” Not because they were literally the offsprings of a natural phenomenon but, because of their violent and explosive nature. In Matthew 23:15, Jesus calls the Pharisees the υἱοὶ of hell because their character reflected the nature of darkness. Since we have so many passages that represent Jesus as eternal we know that υἱὸν cannot then refer to descendency because as God he has none. Only as a man do we see him as with a linage as a descentent of the human race. Jesus, who is the υἱὸν θεοῦ – Son of God, is so because he bears the same nature, form, and and moral character of God. Christians are also called υἱοί Θεοῦ - sons of God for the same reason. As Christians we take on the character and nature of God. We are also called the τέκνα - children of God because we are his children by adoption, a term that is never used in scripture to refer to Christ. Jesus is NEVER called the child of God, always the υἱὸν - the one who bears the image of God. This is Phil 2 and Heb 1.
Last edited:
But Old Hermit, Iggy is for wimps who cannot abide any view other than their own
nor any suggestion that they might lack humility.
No worries though. Do carry on.
nor any suggestion that they might lack humility.
No worries though. Do carry on.