No, its a serious error that reminds many of historical heresies. You should be careful with words.
The Cosmos
- Thread starter Webers.Home
- 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.
No, its a serious error that reminds many of historical heresies. You should be careful with words.
.
Q: One translation of John 1:18 says that Jesus is the only-begotten god;
while another translation says Jesus is the only begotten son. Which
translation is correct?
A: Either translation will do because, biologically speaking, they're both
saying the very same thing.
Depending upon one's translation of choice; Jesus Christ is described in John
1:14, John 1:18, John 3:16, and John 3:18, as the only-begotten god and/or
the only-begotten son of God. All four passages are translated from the
Greek word monogenes (mon-og-en-ace') which is a combination of two
words.
The first is mono, which music buffs recognize as a single channel rather
than two or four in surround sound stereo. Mono is very common; e.g.
monogamy, monofilament, monotonous, mononucleotide, monochrome,
monogram, monolith, monologue, monomial, et al.
The other word is genes; from whence we get the English word gene; which
Webster's defines as a biological term indicating a part of a cell that controls
or influences the appearance, growth, etc., of a living thing. In other words:
monogenes refers to one biological gene set rather than many.
Monogenes always, and without exception, refers to a parent's sole
biological child in the New Testament. If a parent has two or more biological
children, none of them qualify as monogenes because in order to qualify as a
monogenes child, the child has to be an only child. Obviously then, an
adopted child can never be monogenes in the home because it wouldn't be
the home's biological child. Examples of monogenes children are located at
Luke 7:12, Luke 8:42, and Luke 9:38.
So then, scientifically speaking, Christ is unique in that he is God's biological
offspring, while God's other sons are not; viz: they're placed as sons, i.e.
adopted. (Rom 8:15-16, Gal 4:4-6, Eph 1:4-5)
Q: God literally fathered a child?
A: I think it's probably a bit more accurate to say that God literally
co-fathered a child.
Q: How did he do it? Is there a Mrs. God? And who was the other father?
A: Jesus' conception, described at Luke 1:26-35, wasn't only miraculous, it
was a curious combination of human and divine.
David contributed the human element. (Luke 1:32, Acts 13:22-23, Rom 1:1-
3, and 2Tim 2:8)
God contributed the divine element. (Luke 1:35 and 1John 3:9)
Jesus then, is just as much God's offspring as he is David's; and just as
much David's offspring as he is God's.
To say that this is baffling, illogical, unscientific, and unreasonable would be
an understatement. In my mind's normal way of thinking, Christ's rather odd
case of mixed-species genetics is an outlandish fantasy that, biologically,
makes no sense at all. It's sort of like crossing a meerkat with an apricot to
produce a mammalian fruit tree. But; the circumstances of Christ's
conception are in the Bible, so those of us who call ourselves Christians have
got to accept it.
_
Q: One translation of John 1:18 says that Jesus is the only-begotten god;
while another translation says Jesus is the only begotten son. Which
translation is correct?
A: Either translation will do because, biologically speaking, they're both
saying the very same thing.
Depending upon one's translation of choice; Jesus Christ is described in John
1:14, John 1:18, John 3:16, and John 3:18, as the only-begotten god and/or
the only-begotten son of God. All four passages are translated from the
Greek word monogenes (mon-og-en-ace') which is a combination of two
words.
The first is mono, which music buffs recognize as a single channel rather
than two or four in surround sound stereo. Mono is very common; e.g.
monogamy, monofilament, monotonous, mononucleotide, monochrome,
monogram, monolith, monologue, monomial, et al.
The other word is genes; from whence we get the English word gene; which
Webster's defines as a biological term indicating a part of a cell that controls
or influences the appearance, growth, etc., of a living thing. In other words:
monogenes refers to one biological gene set rather than many.
Monogenes always, and without exception, refers to a parent's sole
biological child in the New Testament. If a parent has two or more biological
children, none of them qualify as monogenes because in order to qualify as a
monogenes child, the child has to be an only child. Obviously then, an
adopted child can never be monogenes in the home because it wouldn't be
the home's biological child. Examples of monogenes children are located at
Luke 7:12, Luke 8:42, and Luke 9:38.
So then, scientifically speaking, Christ is unique in that he is God's biological
offspring, while God's other sons are not; viz: they're placed as sons, i.e.
adopted. (Rom 8:15-16, Gal 4:4-6, Eph 1:4-5)
Q: God literally fathered a child?
A: I think it's probably a bit more accurate to say that God literally
co-fathered a child.
Q: How did he do it? Is there a Mrs. God? And who was the other father?
A: Jesus' conception, described at Luke 1:26-35, wasn't only miraculous, it
was a curious combination of human and divine.
David contributed the human element. (Luke 1:32, Acts 13:22-23, Rom 1:1-
3, and 2Tim 2:8)
God contributed the divine element. (Luke 1:35 and 1John 3:9)
Jesus then, is just as much God's offspring as he is David's; and just as
much David's offspring as he is God's.
To say that this is baffling, illogical, unscientific, and unreasonable would be
an understatement. In my mind's normal way of thinking, Christ's rather odd
case of mixed-species genetics is an outlandish fantasy that, biologically,
makes no sense at all. It's sort of like crossing a meerkat with an apricot to
produce a mammalian fruit tree. But; the circumstances of Christ's
conception are in the Bible, so those of us who call ourselves Christians have
got to accept it.
_
.
● Col 1:15 . . He is the firstborn of all creation
The Watchtower Society has appropriated that verse as evidence that God's
son was the first thing created before everything else in the cosmos.
However, the New Testament Greek word for "firstborn" in that verse is
prototokos, which never means created first; no, it always means born first.
The correct Greek word for created first is protoktistos.
The average Watchtower Society missionary doesn't know the difference
between prototokos and protoktistos; and no doubt would care little about it
anyway. To some of them; born first and created first are essentially one
and the same.
But are they the same? No. Birthing requires a parent while creating
requires a craftsman. Birthing produces progeny while crafting produces
projects. God's son wasn't a project; no, he's progeny.
Firstborn doesn't always refer to birth order. The term also refers to pay
grade, so to speak, and as such is transferrable from an elder to a younger,
e.g. Jacob and Esau (Gen 25:23) Manasseh and Ephraim (Gen 48:13-14)
and Reuben and Joseph (Gen 49:3-4, 1Chr 5:1).
David was God's firstborn (Ps 89:20-27). The position was later transferred
to one of David's sons (Dan 7:13-14, Ps 110:1, Matt 22:42-45, Phil 2:9-11).
So for now and forever; neither anything nor anybody is higher up on
creation's chain of command than Christ.
_
● Col 1:15 . . He is the firstborn of all creation
The Watchtower Society has appropriated that verse as evidence that God's
son was the first thing created before everything else in the cosmos.
However, the New Testament Greek word for "firstborn" in that verse is
prototokos, which never means created first; no, it always means born first.
The correct Greek word for created first is protoktistos.
The average Watchtower Society missionary doesn't know the difference
between prototokos and protoktistos; and no doubt would care little about it
anyway. To some of them; born first and created first are essentially one
and the same.
But are they the same? No. Birthing requires a parent while creating
requires a craftsman. Birthing produces progeny while crafting produces
projects. God's son wasn't a project; no, he's progeny.
Firstborn doesn't always refer to birth order. The term also refers to pay
grade, so to speak, and as such is transferrable from an elder to a younger,
e.g. Jacob and Esau (Gen 25:23) Manasseh and Ephraim (Gen 48:13-14)
and Reuben and Joseph (Gen 49:3-4, 1Chr 5:1).
David was God's firstborn (Ps 89:20-27). The position was later transferred
to one of David's sons (Dan 7:13-14, Ps 110:1, Matt 22:42-45, Phil 2:9-11).
So for now and forever; neither anything nor anybody is higher up on
creation's chain of command than Christ.
_
Who said there is no Love in Heaven without angels/inhabitants? Now what i did PLAINLY and clearly said, is if there were NO Angels or inhabitants in Heaven then there would be no love. But you see someone who lacks understanding and did not understand that statement accused me of saying there is no love in Heaven, do you see that now, or should i explain more?
^i^
††† In His Holy and Precious Name, Jesus Christ †††
DiscipleDave
As I said, the love that was in heaven existed between God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. What more is there to explain? Including angels into the equation is erroneous, as if to say there would be no love without them. Love existed before angels did. That is all
Are you aware that Scriptures plainly and clearly teach that ALL LIARS will burn in the lake of fire and brimstone? Rev 21:8. Brother you testify on a Christian Chat that i have been shown multiple times, by multiple brothers on multiple issues, then it should not be to hard to reveal to me one post where that was done. Else you are lying and need to repent of falsely accusing a Brother in the Jesus Christ. Just one post where i have been shown a Scripture that contradicts anything i have said, anywhere on CC, If you claim that i have been shown Multiple times, then how hard would it be to reveal the evidence of this accusation? Or are you merely saying this, without any knowledge at all that i have been shown any errors multiple times.
i have been on CC for some years, and i always in everything that i teach challenge people to show one verse that is contrary to what God has told me, and i tell you. And to my knowledge to this date, not one person has been able to do so, yet you testify that i have been shown my errors multiple times, by multiple brothers, on multiple issues. (note: why did you leave out multiple sisters?) Tell me where has someone shown me my error? If you claim multiple times, then it should be easy to find right?
How is it, you will find NONE, and won't show one post where i have been corrected by Scriptures. But so you know brother and so you can go to the Lord and ask for forgiveness of bearing false witness against a servant of Jesus Christ, "i forgive you"
^i^
††† In His Holy and Precious Name, Jesus Christ †††
DiscipleDave
here's what you plainly said:
you said, if there be no inhabitants of heaven, there would be no love. and that this is why angels were created, with the plain implication that without angels having been created to populate heaven, love couldn't exist. in fact, it was in reply to me, who was questioning you about your previous statements clearly communicating that God has no plan or purpose for angels other than to exist as objects of His love.
more than one person corrected that proclamation, reminding you that God is love, and that love exists between the eternal Father and eternal Son, apart from any created being.
if you still think love didn't exist in heaven before God created angels, then yes, maybe you ought to explain more. because we still think your statement is wrong.
sigh .. . .. .. .
Jesus was begotten of the Father, Yes or no?
Jesus was first born, Yes or no?
Before Jesus the Father existed. There was ONLY the FATHER. At this time there was no Heaven, no Jesus, NOTHING. Jesus was then begotten of the Father, First Born of the Father. God the Father who has no physical matter whatsoever, created Jesus in a physical body. God the Father is a spirit, not flesh, not physical. God the Son, Jesus Christ is a body, Glorified Flesh, physical. What? Jesus created Himself. lol.
The Father begotten His Son Jesus Christ, which is the Father created Him. And He was the first begotten, the word first reveals the Father created something else after that, which is the Holy Ghost, which is the Second begotten of the Father. Jesus created all things that WERE MADE. Jesus created all physical things. He created Heaven, He created Angels, He created the universe.
without anyone to express LOVE TO, there is no love. A single person on a deserted island loves no person, nor does any person love them.
^i^
††† In His Holy and Precious Name, Jesus Christ †††
DiscipleDave
Jesus proclaimed Himself to be the “Alpha and Omega” in Revelation 1:8, 11; 21:6; and 22:13. Alpha and omega are the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet. Among the Jewish rabbis, it was common to use the first and the last letters of the Hebrew alphabet to denote the whole of anything, from beginning to end. Jesus as the beginning and end of all things is a reference to no one but the true God. This statement of eternality could apply only to God. It is seen especially in Revelation 22:13, where Jesus proclaims that He is “the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.”
One of the meanings of Jesus being the “Alpha and Omega” is that He was at the beginning of all things and will be at the close. It is equivalent to saying He always existed and always will exist. It was Christ, as second Person of the Trinity, who brought about the creation: “Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made” (John 1:3), and His Second Coming will be the beginning of the end of creation as we know it (2 Peter 3:10). As God incarnate, He has no beginning, nor will He have any end with respect to time, being from everlasting to everlasting.
A second meaning of Jesus as the “Alpha and Omega” is that the phrase identifies Him as the God of the Old Testament. Isaiah ascribes this aspect of Jesus’ nature as part of the triune God in several places. “I, the Lord, am the first, and with the last I am He” (41:4). “I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God” (Isaiah 44:6). “I am he; I am the first, I also am the last” (Isaiah 48:12). These are clear indications of the eternal nature of the Godhead. gotquestions.org/alpha-and-omega.html
hooray! let's add another instance to the list you say doesn't exist
as a mathematician i love to make n + 1 out of n
For in Him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through Him and for Him.
(Colossians 1:16)
but you say,
God says all things - visible & invisible, physical and non-physical, are made through Him and also for Him
what, Jesus created Himself for Himself?
oh, then that makes Him what?
that makes Jesus = I AM THAT I AM
ain't it great learning humility?
You say NO. lol. As if a husband and wife did not decide to create children. The Answer is YES. A husband and wife can choose to create children or not have children. and they are BORN.
True, so the Father created Jesus, yes? Or do you think Jesus was born by accident? lol. The Father created Jesus Christ His first born, His only begotten Son. The Father then created the Holy Ghost, His second born. Jesus, the first born, the only begotten son of the Father created all physical matter in the universe. Jesus created Heaven, the angels, the universe
Jesus has the same properties as the Father for the most part. The Father has no physical matter whatsoever, He is Truly Spirit, However Jesus is physical matter. And just like a son can be like His Father, so too is Jesus like His Father, they are ONE. And we, if we Love One Another and believe in Jesus are ONE with them.
^i^
††† In His Holy and Precious Name, Jesus Christ †††
DiscipleDave
As I said, the love that was in heaven existed between God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. What more is there to explain? Including angels into the equation is erroneous, as if to say there would be no love without them. Love existed before angels did. That is all
What you say is True. Love did not exist until there was something to love. Before Jesus was begotten of the Father, there was only the Father. Love only existed when the Father created something that He could Love, and that was His first begotten Son Jesus Christ. Before Jesus Christ there was no Heaven, no angels, No Holy Ghost, NO LOVE. How is this so hard for this generation to grasp?
^i^
††† In His Holy and Precious Name, Jesus Christ †††
DiscipleDave
Brother, i stand corrected, you and the others are correct, and i now see the error of my thinking. i was talking about a time Before Heaven and before Jesus Christ, i should have worded it better than i did.
Please accept my apology PostHuman. and Magenta, please accept my apology. i understand now, that my wording was wrong. Thank you for correcting me, and again, i am truly sorry.
^i^
††† In His Holy and Precious Name, Jesus Christ †††
DiscipleDave
who opens and closes the womb?
what does scripture say about that? what's the Biblical picture of fertility and conception?
for You formed my inward parts; You knitted me together in my mother's womb.
(Psalm 139:13)
God stepped in after the parents created?
it is good that God came up with a plan for you after your parents surprised Him by creating you
before I formed you in the womb I knew you
(Jeremiah 1:5)
(Jeremiah 1:5)
wait..
before I was born the Lord called me
(Isaiah 49:1)
(Isaiah 49:1)
hmm...
what's hard to grasp here, i think, is the fact that of the Son it is written, "they shall call Him Everlasting Father"
i do not believe there is such a time as 'before Jesus Christ' -- that set of time is in math written, ∅, the empty set, null.
i agree with all you say above, except what is bolded and underlined above. The Truth is that Jesus is the first begotten son of God the Father. There was a specific time that He was begotten, born, created. FIRST BORN. Jesus made all things that were made. Jesus did NOT make Himself. Jesus Christ is physical being, the Son of God, the first born of the Father. Jesus began when the Father created Him.
Only the Father in Heaven, is TRULY infinite. For the Father has no beginning, nor any end. Jesus on the other hand was begotten of the Father, became the Son of the Father, Jesus had a start. How can i explain this? It's like God creating a life that is immortal. That life can't die or be killed, and will live for ever and ever and never cease to be, but even though it is immortal, that life had a start when God created it. Before Jesus was born in Heaven, the Father existed. Before Heaven was created the Father existed. The Father created Jesus Christ, His Firstborn. Jesus then created all things that were made, Heaven, Angels, the Universe. Before Jesus there was no Love. Which is the very point i was trying to make to another poster, without anything to love, love ceases to be. The Father existed, True, but with nothing to Love, Love did not exist, until which time the Father created something to Love, Only at the creation of His Firstborn did LOVE come into existence. God walking on the moon Loves NOBODY and Nobody loves Him. No we can speculate that there is Love on the moon, because God is there, and He is Love, but without anyone to Love, Love is not expressed. Love that is not expressed is not love. The Father created Jesus Christ, and called Him His Son, His firstborn. Jesus then created all things in the universe for His Father who created Him. Now because of the inhabitants of all of Heaven, Love is everywhere. But as i was saying before if Heaven had no inhabitants (Jesus included) there would be no love.
^i^
††† In His Holy and Precious Name, Jesus Christ †††
DiscipleDave
