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.
