Bill you have overlooked and completely negate the fact
that Jesus as God's Son was begotten on a certain day:
Phil 2:5-11 and Isa 7:14, 9:6 refer to the
incarnation when God the Word, the second person of the Divine Trinity emptied
Himself to take on a human body and redeem mankind. This was when God had a
son through Mary (Matt 1:8, 25, Luke 1:35, John 1:14) and this took
place on a certain day �THIS DAY� have I begotten thee� (Hebrews 1:5-7) and therefore we can
not say that God had a Son before this time proving that sonship in
connection with God has to refer to humanity and not to
deity.
As God the
person we now know of as Jesus Christ had no beginning, was not begotten, was
not a Son, and did not come into being. He always existed as God (Psalm 90:2,
Micah 5:2, John 1:1-2, Hebrews 1:8); but as a man
and as God�s Son He was not
eternal, He did have a beginning. He was begotten - this
being at the same time Mary had a Son. Therefore
the doctrine of eternal sonship
of Jesus Christ is irreconcilable to
reason, is unscriptural and is contradictory to itself.
Eternity has no beginning, so if He has been God from
eternity, then He could not have a beginning as God.
Eternity has no reference to time, so if He was begotten �THIS DAY,� then it was
done in time and not in eternity. The
word Son supposes time, generation, father, mother, beginning, and
conception -
unless one is a son by creation as Adam (Luke 3:38) and angels (Job 1:6, 2:1,
38:7; Genesis 6:1-4.
Time, created, beginning, are opposites to God and
eternity and are absolutely impossible to reconcile with them. If Sonship refers
to deity, not to humanity, then this person of the Deity had a beginning in time
and not in eternity. It is plainly stated in Psalm 2:7, Acts 13:33, Hebrews 1:5,
5:5 that God had a Son �THIS DAY� and
not in eternity. It is stated in Hebrews
1:5-7, Luke 1:36, Matthew 1:18-25 when this took place. It was something over
1900 years ago. It had been predicted that God would have a Son (Isaiah 7:14,
9:6, Hebrews 1:5, Matthew 1:18-25, Luke 1:32-35). When the Virgin conceived of
the Holy Ghost (Matthew 1:20), this was fulfilled, and not at any other
time.
To say that God had an eternal Son would mean He had two;
but it is plainly stated that Jesus was �THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF THE
FATHER� (John 1:14, 18; 3:16-18; 1 John
4:9.
jt: He was the Word of God from the
foundation of the world. He became a son
at the incarnation when God provided Him a body. He was begotten, not made and His blood was/is the eternal blood
of the New Covenant which is non
sectarian in spite of the fact that
He was born under the law of Moses to a
young Jewish girl -
To the contrary, Judy:
As far back as God goes, the Word was God --
- "In beginning was the
Word, and the Word was with the God, and God was the
Word." (John 1.1 -- wooden literal translation)
The Word "became
flesh." (see John 1.14)
But he was always the Son; i.e., he is the
eternal Son --
- "Jesus answered, 'If
I honor Myself, My honor is nothing. It is My Father who honors Me, of whom
you say that He is your God.' ... Jesus said to them, 'Most assuredly, I say
to you, before Abraham was, I AM.'" (John 8.54,58)
- "And now, O Father,
glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You
before the world was." (John 17.5)
- "Father, I desire
that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may
behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the
foundation of the world." (John 17.24)
He was a Jew from the Seed (sperma -- Literally "sperm")
of Abraham --
- "Now to Abraham and his Seed were the
promises made. He does not say, 'And to seeds,' as of many, but as of one,
'And to your Seed,' who is Christ." (Galatians 3.16)
He was a Jew from the fruit of David's body (karpou tes
osphuos autou -- Literally the "fruit of his genitals") --
-
"Men and brethren, let me speak
freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and
his tomb is with us to this day. Therefore, being a prophet, and
knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of
his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to
sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the
resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His
flesh see corruption. This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all
witnesses. Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having
received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this
which you now see and hear. For David did not ascend into the heavens,
but he says himself: 'The LORD said to my Lord, "Sit at My right
hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool."' Therefore let all
the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you
crucified, both Lord and Christ." (Acts 2.29-36)
Judy, in all sincerity may I suggest that you not push this one.
You are treading on sacred ground. At the same time you are bordering on
denying both the full divinity of Christ and his human heritage. Jesus
Christ is the eternal Son of the Father, the Word of God; he is also fully
human, born of a Jewish woman of the line of David, Jacob, Isaac, and
Abraham. Please reconsider what you are saying. This one is too important
to deny.
Sincerely, your brother,
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 9:30
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Mind of
Christ
jt: He was the Word of God from the foundation of
the world.
He became a son at the incarnation when God
provided Him a body.
He was begotten, not made and His blood was/is the
eternal blood
of the New Covenant which is non sectarian in spite
of the fact that
He was born under the law of Moses to a young
Jewish girl -
He was the Son of the Father, the Word who was
with God and was God "in beginning," and when he appeared in a flesh
body, he had Jewish blood running through his veins.
Bill
jt: Actually He was
the Word of the Father, who, in the fullness of time, appeared among us
in a flesh body.
I AM attempting to get rooted in That Mind! Was
Messiah a Greek or Hebrew? - slade
jt: Slade and Lance, is there any good
reason why we can not forget about both Greek and
Hebrew
mindsets and begin to focus upon and
discuss "the mind of Christ"? jht
|
