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.
