John wrote: The Word of life and the Son of God are the
same. What is true of one is true of the other. Because
this is true, John speaks of them in the same equation, the same breath, in
I John 1:1-3. Jesus is the eternal life manifested to us
by the Father.
Judy responds : Only after the incarnation and
resurrection and John is not speaking of them in the same breath...
Neither does Bill see them as the same thing, he does not see God's Word as
a living thing - yesterday said " To deny the
eternal Sonship of Christ and to set in his place a rationally-static
"Word" doctrine, is to depersonalize the relationship most central to
the heart of God: the Father-Son relationship" .
Judy, this is the second time you've mentioned this. I still
don't have a clue as to what you think I've communicated here. I
do see the Word and the Son as the same. It is you who says
"they" (pl) are not.
jt: I say they are not because I believe we
should use spiritual words to convey spiritual truths. With this in
mind I don't see The
Word of God being called The Eternal Son of God anywhere in
the Old Testament, do you?
I see the Word and the Son as eternally the same Person of the
Trinity, although expressed in different language at different times,
depending on the context and intent of the biblical authors (in conjunction
with the Holy Spirit of course).
jt: You may see them as eternally the same
Bill but the Holy Spirit who spoke through the prophets and inspired
scripture apparently made a separation; if we were supposed to call them the
same from the foundation of the world it would be written in scripture
somewhere other than after the incarnation only. Every mention of the
Son in the OT is prophetic and is written in the future
tense.
The Son and the Word are the same, Judy, and they shall
remain so -- even if someone tries to separate "them"
(pl), making one eternal, the other not, and making the relationship
the eternal one has with the "Father" into something other than a Father/Son
relationship.
jt: I don't think anyone is saying that the
second member of the Godhead has become temporal Bill. However, He has
moved on and so should we. He is no longer Son of God, and Son of Man.
He is now King of Kings and Lord of Lords, so why hold him hostage to the title of "Eternal
Son"?
And so I still ask you: Who is this God who changes, and what
then is that relationship which changes to become a Father/Son
relationship? Bill
jt: God's nature and character does not
change ever - but now you are trying to box him into a corner. What
about all of His Redemptive
Names? I guess Slade would call those "His functions" Well
becoming a Son and learning obedience by the things he suffered during that
33.1/2 years in time is/was one of the functions of the second member of the
Godhead who is known as the Word of God, the Word of Truth, and/or the Word
of Life.
