Trinity.

[Homer]

Hi Paidion,

You wrote:

Only Jesus and the Father are divine. Jesus is divine because He is the ONLY-begotten Son of God (not created). God begat no other Sons. For this reason Jesus can also be called "God". John 1:18 in the earliest manuscripts call Him "the only-begotten God".

If I understand you Jesus is divine because he is the only-begotten Son. But monogenes, translated "only begotten" refers to His uniqueness, not how He came to be a Son. Abraham was said to have offered his "only begotten (monogenes) but he also had another son, Ishmael. But Isaac was the unique one.

On the other hand the Hebrew yalad and Geek gennao literally refer a male begetting children with a woman. You appear to use the words figuratively; a literal use would support His becoming the Son when the HS impregnated the virgin Mary.

And you wrote:

The Father is the unbegotten God—the only real God, as Jesus Himself affirmed (John 17:3). The only Son is of the same divine essence as the Father, and is in that sense "God". But He is not "God" either in the sense of being the unbegotten God, or in the sense of being part of the unbegotten God, or in the sense of being united to the unbegotten God in such a way that together they form a compound God.

Definition of essence: the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something. The Trinitarians use this as proof Jesus is God.

Many times I have explained that the act of the begetting of the Son marked the beginning of time, and thus there was no time at which the Son did not exist. Have you not read that explanation?

You keep asserting this but the scriptures contradict you:

Psalm 2:7 (KJV)

7. I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

Acts 13:33 (KJV)

33. God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.


Both the OT and the NT quotation use time words; the Hebrew yowm and the Greek semeron reference an occasion within time. Being begotten on "this day", either there was time when the Son did not exist, or He existed prior to being begotten in the virgin Mary, prior to emptying Himself and becomming the Son which would also fit quite well with your:

My definition of "begotten" is the standard definition of "begotten"

[jriccitelli]

I guess Paidion took some time off, I miss him. But I will leave a message anyhow, maybe Editor will argue with me then (I need someone arguing with me to be happy) + =

You can even say that Jesus is a new creature, or a Divine Son of God. Not Created, but still an offspring of God (As the Mormons say: They are One in purpose, of the same substance, etc, etc, but at least the Mormons and JWs recognize that all this makes Jesus ‘a’ god. Even Islam and Judaism recognize that the New Testament makes Jesus a god)

You imply that it is Jesus’ unity with God that allows Jesus to be Lord, Savior, King, Creator, etc. (or, at least this unity allows God to do these things ‘through’ Jesus). All these things would be fine, like they are in Polytheistic religions, except that God had already established through the Prophets that God is The One God, that there is no other, there is nothing like God, no One is like God, and that Judaism is Monotheistic. God said He would ‘never’ give these titles of Lord, Savior, King etc. to another, but God 'could' do so within Himself: I.e. The Father could give Glory to the Son. And The Father and Son can both be Lord 'if' they are 'actually'' One God, and only if they are One in 'the same' God.

JWs also think they can reason through the term Lord, Savior, King and Creator etc. by saying that God works ‘through’ Jesus in these ways. But this just defies the terms, take Creator for example, did God just act 'through' Jesus to create, or did Jesus create? Creating the Creation was nothing you do simply because you are wearing a badge that says 'creator', as if creator is a 'position'. The creation was designed: atoms, cells, biochemistry, the physics, the super Omniscient thinking that went into creating this universe. Creating the Universe was not something you do because it is bestowed on you, it is something God did because God can create, that’s what makes God God. No-one but God could have had the Omniscience to Create this Universe. Yet we read that Jesus is our Creator.

The same with Lord and Judge and King, you don’t just call someone Lord, if they are just a 'go between'. They have to be able to ‘ACTUALLY’ Lord over the Universe, they have to 'actually be' Just, Righteous, and All Wise to be ‘ABLE’ to Judge the Universe. They have to have the ‘ability’ and ‘Power’ to Save, within themselves, to give LIFE, to ‘Actually’ be HOLY in order to be HOLY. To suppose God has given these things to Jesus, or bestowed them on him, as if Jesus did not previously, or naturally possess all these things, would be why Biblical Monotheism does not accept the assumption that another being could ever assume the ‘abilities’ that only God is able to fulfill. It turns Jesus into a sham façade of a Creator, Savior and Lord; these terms are for GOD alone. Jus saying,

[Paidion]

Greetings Homer,

If I understand you Jesus is divine because he is the only-begotten Son. But monogenes, translated "only begotten" refers to His uniqueness, not how He came to be a Son. Abraham was said to have offered his "only begotten (monogenes) but he also had another son, Ishmael. But Isaac was the unique one.

I've heard this argument before, but it doesn't work any better to say that "μονογενης" means "unique" (only one of its kind). For since Abraham had another son, then Isaac was not his unique son. I think the reason Isaac was called Abraham's "only-begotten son" is that he was the only son begotten through Sarah, from whom the promise would come.

Lexicons disagree as to the origin of the second part of "μονογενης", that is, the "γενης" part. The Online Bible Greek Lexicon, and also Strong's Greek, says its origin is "γινομαι" (to come into being). The NASB Greek Lexicon and the Abbot-Smith Greek Lexicon say its origin is "γενος". I think that "γενναω" (to beget) could be the origin, but even if "γενος" IS the origin, this doesn't necessarily change any thing. For though "γενος" CAN mean "kind", "class", etc., it can also mean "offspring" as in Acts 17:28 and also Acts 17:29.

"...for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also His offspring .’ (Acts 17:28 ESV)
"Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man’s devising.
(Acts 17:29)

Paul indicated to the people of Athens that we are all the offspring of God. But in a very special sense, Jesus is the "only offspring" of God—just as both Isaac and Ishmael were offspring of Abraham, but Isaac, in a very special sense, was "the only offspring" of Abraham.

According to the ESV, "γενος" can also refer to being born. Notice how the ESV translates the word in the following verse:

Now a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man and mighty in the Scriptures, came to Ephesus. (Acts 18:24 ESV)

So as the early Christians affirmed, it's most appropriate to say that Jesus was the only-begotten or only-born Son of God, and that He was begotten or born before all ages.

[jriccitelli]

You said it, kind of, you said:

"For since Abraham had another son, then Isaac was not his unique son. I think the reason Isaac was called Abraham's "only-begotten son" is that he was the only son begotten through Sarah, from whom the promise would come" (Paidion)

Isaac was his unique son ‘because’ he was through Sarah. Yes.
Monogenes by itself, is a simple word to understand. We all agree to its literal meaning, but the context will tell us if is used figuratively or literally.
Monogenes (begotten) does mean unique (alone, single). Not only the words etymology, but by implication, the implication being that if there are two, it is no longer mono (As with Monogamy and monopoly).
Monogenes is a simple word to understand, we use the prefix Mono to mean one. Same for ‘genes’: birth/ genesis/generated/from, there is no mystery about the word.
The bibles contexts also give us our understanding of monogenes: we know Abraham had two literal sons, and we also know God does not literally have babies, therefore mono can/must imply unique, just as genes can/must imply a figurative form of birth as we both agree.

“… it can also mean "offspring" as in Acts 17:28 and also Acts 17:29” (Paidion)

But still we know God does not actually produce offspring, and we know Paul didn’t mean we actually came out of God, like literal offspring

“Jesus is the "only offspring" of God—just as both Isaac and Ishmael were offspring of Abraham, but Isaac, in a very special sense, was "the only offspring" of Abraham” (Paidion)

Jesus is most likely not a literal offspring (although you are insisting this is literal) just as the term ‘only begotten’ is figurative in the case of Isaac and Ishmael (Just as Esau was neither the first born, but he is in the context, figuratively, and positionally). So when you said:

God begat no other Sons. For this reason Jesus can also be called "God" (Paidion Sept.20)

According to that line, what if God did begat other sons, wouldn’t that allow them to be called “God” also?
How can ‘only’ begotten give us reason we can ‘call’ Jesus God, if there is then no-reason God could not have more literally begotten Sons?

[Paidion]

Definition of essence: the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something. The Trinitarians use this as proof Jesus is God.

I agree with this definition of "essence". Jesus is "the exact imprint of his (the Father's) essence." (Heb 1:3). I agree that Jesus is of the same essence as the Father. I also agree that this is evidence that He is "God". I put quotes around "God" to indicate that He is not "God" in the sense that the Father is God. That is, the Father is "the only true (or real) God" as Jesus addressed Him in his prayer. The Son is not "the only true God". Jesus said, "This is eternal life that they may know You the only true God color=#BF0000]AND[/color] Jesus Christ whom You have sent." (John 17:3). If the Father is the only true God, it follows that Jesus is NOT the only true God. Also with that little word "and", Jesus clearly indicates that He is other than "the only true God".

Many times I have explained that the act of the begetting of the Son marked the beginning of time, and thus there was no time at which the Son did not exist. Have you not read that explanation?

You keep asserting this but the scriptures contradict you:

Psalm 2:7 (KJV)

7. I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

Acts 13:33 (KJV)

33. God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

These passages do not contradict me. We cannot expect David to have understood the beginning of time. None of the early writers stated that His begetting marked the beginning of time. They simply affirmed that He was begotten "before all ages." Certainly Arius didn't understand that his begetting marked the beginning of time. That's why Arius affirmed that since He was begotten by a single act of God, there must have been a time at which He did not exist. However this was denied by second century Christians as well as fourth-century Trinitarians. Yet, the latter did affirm that He was "begotten before all ages". But when Arius carried that fact too far by affirming that there was a time at which the Son did not exist, then the Trinitarians realized that they had to alter the phrase "begotten before all ages" (which was contained in the original Nicene Creed). So they changed the Nicene Creed to read, "eternally begotten."

I cannot demonstrate scripturally that the begetting of the Son marked the beginning of time. But I formed that theory in an attempt to harmonize the statements:

1. The Son was begotten as a single act of God.
2. There never was a time at which the Son did not exist.

[Paidion]

Being begotten on "this day", either there was time when the Son did not exist, or He existed prior to being begotten in the virgin Mary, prior to emptying Himself and becomming the Son...

Well yes, of course He existed "prior to being begotten in the virgin Mary." That was his begetting as a human being.

The begetting to which I refer is his begetting as the Son of God, or even his begetting as God (John 1:18 where "God" is used as "deity" or "divine Being", but not "the only true God", the Creator of all things). The Father created all things THROUGH the Son, that is, the Son was the agent—just as the Yahweh the Son was the agent who rained fire and brimstone of Sodom and Gomorrah from Yahweh the Father out of heaven (Gen. 19:24). Both Father and Son, though two distinct divine Individuals, share the name "Yahweh".

[dizerner]

[user account removed]

[jriccitelli]

"If the Father is the only true God, it follows that Jesus is NOT the only true God" (Paidion)

The only thing you can conclude from the above is: Either there are two true Gods, or Jesus is a false God.
I do not understand why, being so close, yet so far, Paidion does not trust Jesus and the Father are: The One True God?

[Paidion]

I do not understand why, being so close, yet so far, Paidion does not trust Jesus and the Father are: The One True God?

You OUGHT to understand. The concept of two (or three) divine Persons forming one compound God is found nowhere in the Scriptures. NEVER does the word "God" in the New Testament refer to a compound God known as "The Trinity".

I believe my position to be identical with that of the first and second century church.

[jriccitelli]

It is not a concept, that: Jesus is Lord. It is a ‘precept’ that there is One God and no one like God.

I believe it would be hard for you to read any passage of scripture and ‘not’ see Christ Jesus, from Genesis through Revelation. I see Him everywhere in the scriptures, in fact Christ is the Word. And throughout the NT Jesus, the Father, The Lord, and God are used so that it is often impossible to distinguish one from the other. So no, I ought not to understand how you don’t see it.
“… looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus’ (Titus 2)
‘And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life. 21 Little children, guard yourselves from idols. (1John 5:20-21)
I have a ‘whole book full of passages’ that describe Jesus as having all the attributes, all the same characteristics, the same name, the same honor, and the same glory as God, yet there is Only One God. You have two.

God never changes, but don’t you agree more is revealed:
“… but we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory” (1Cor.1:7)
"Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them…” (Matt.13:11)
The mystery of salvation was kept secret, in parables and mystery, but now it has been revealed, to those who have ears. There are about seven different mysteries that Paul (and others) define, first is the mystery of Christ, then there is the mystery of the Church, Gentiles, Israel, resurrection, etc. The crucifixion of the Messiah was a mystery, the gentiles grafting in, the Gospel, etc. was hidden but now it has been revealed, isn’t this true?
'He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him 10 with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ… (Eph.1:9)

The following comments are on 1Cor, the mystery:
Those who receive the doctrine of Christ as Divine, and, having been enlightened by the Holy Spirit, have looked well into it, see not only the plain history of Christ, and him crucified, but the deep and admirable designs of Divine wisdom therein. It is the mystery made manifest to the saints, Col 1:26, though formerly hid from the heathen world; it was only shown in dark types and distant prophecies, but now is revealed and made known by the Spirit of God. Jesus Christ is the Lord of glory; a title much too great for any creature. (Matthew Henry, 1Cor.2:6-9)
"We proclaim the divine wisdom hidden in a mystery." The apostle does not say that their preaching was mysterious, nor that their doctrine was unintelligible, but he refers to the fact that this wisdom had been "hidden in a mystery" from people until that time, but was then revealed by the gospel. In other words, he does not say that what they then declared was hidden in a mystery, but that they made known the divine wisdom, which had been concealed from the minds of people. (Barnes, 1Cor.2:6-9)
It implies the very reverse of any esoteric teaching. Hidden. It was "hidden from the wise and prudent, but revealed to babes" (Matthew 11:25). Before the worlds; literally, before the ages; before time began. (Pulpit comm. 1Cor.2:6-9)