> General Discussions
John 1:1-5
AK4:
--- Quote ---Why can't Jesus be both created and begotten??
--- End quote ---
Akira, read through this whole thread to find that answer. It is very well argued and explained the difference between created and begotten.
Roy Monis:
--- Quote from: Dave in Tenn on August 20, 2008, 05:19:15 PM ---As Ray has pointed out, it is axiomatic that for God to be Father, He must have (in this case) a Son.
I agree with Marques that the words 'created', 'begotten', 'come out of' present no problem to me any more than 'justification', 'propitiation', 'redemption' present no problem--they are specific aspects (in the context of explaining) of the same thing.
The most telling verse in my understanding is in Hebrews.
Heb 1:1 God, having spoken in former times in fragmentary and varied fashion to our forefathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 has in these last days spoken to us by a Son whom he appointed to be the heir of everything and through whom he also made the universe.
Heb 1:3 He is the reflection of God's glory and the exact likeness of his being, and he holds everything together by his powerful word. After he had provided a cleansing from sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Highest Majesty
Heb 1:4 and became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is better than theirs.
Though the KJV and its followers translates the Greek as 'angels' rather than 'messengers', it seems very clear to me that the writer of Hebrews is speaking about the Prophets of old as 'messengers' because that's how he starts his thought.
Heb. 1:3 is the key, for me. The writer makes three statements (underlined) concerning Christ before his sacrifice. The third statement helps my understanding the most, because I cannot fathom the full meaning of the others. "He holds everything together by his powerful word." He is clearly Christ, the Creator.
It helps because it points out more clearly the WAY in which God interacts with the physical universe. Surely He created it, but to 'sustain it' or 'hold it together' implies a continued 'interface' between God Who is Spirit and the physical, of which we are a part. Clearly, it is Christ the Son who is the Creator, the Sustainer, and the 'holder together'. He is the God who 'comes out of' the Father and HE and the Father are One. For me, Christ is the interface of Spirit God with physical creation.
It's my personal belief that physical creation itself has much more of a connection with Spirit and much less a 'distinction from' than common understanding. Heb. 1:3 gives evidence of this. I am hoping that Ray's conference in Nashville and the materials that come out of that will either correct or strengthen my understanding.
I still maintain that words are not enough to fully comprehend God. But they are what we have, and we would have precious little understanding without them. His words are Truth. We just need to know what they really MEAN. I certainly don't claim to, and would be highly reluctant to worship a God who COULD be 'explained'.
--- End quote ---
Hi! Dave in Tenn
True for God to be a Father He must have a Son or daughter, in this case a Son. But we are told that this Son/Word was with the Father from the very beginning, in His bosom (Jn.1:1-3...18). If the Son was with the Father from eternity then He wasn't or could not have been created. The only option open would be for the Father to give birth to Him. Which is the point I am making. Christ was not created but legitimately born of the Father. And there is a very big difference between the two where Deity is concerned.
God bless you brother in our joint walk in Christ.
Love in Christ Jesus.
Roy UK
mharrell08:
I actually can see where Roy is coming from as I look in the scriptures regarding begotten & created. But we should probably drop this issue before it becomes an argument filled thread that eventually gets locked down.
Personally, I think people may look at begotten & created as the same but I do not believe it is done as a way to demean Jesus. That's why I don't believe this is an issue worth all the fuss. I always looked at Christ as 'out of the Father'. Whether that is begotten or created, I never put that much thought into it. It doesn't seem to be an issue that keeps one from being of the Elect which is what our main goal is, you know?
This issue just seems kind of petty but that's just my opinion. If others have stronger feelings regarding this, I don't mean to belittle your opinon. It's just I don't believe that most of the members here take great issue with using begotten or created or 'out of'. Either usage doesn't change the fact that we are to live our lives after Him. Neither usage is of any edifying to make one spiritually mature.
Also, how about emailing Ray to see what he thinks?
Thanks,
Marques
Dave in Tenn:
From Roy: This how I see it, brother, but I don't quite understand your statement; "We just need to know what they really MEAN. I certainly don't claim to, and would be highly reluctant to worship a God who COULD be 'explained'." Maybe you'd like to enlighten me?
First off...I don't disagree with your understanding of God or the relationship of Father and Son.
The only way I can think of to 'enlighten' you about what I said is with another example. Christ is brother, savior, husband, master, in us, with us and many other things in relation to us. All true and all at the same time. If I wanted to argue that Christ could not be my brother AND my bridegroom (especially since I am a man) at the same time, you wouldn't agree with that, surely.
These are relationships to which WE are a party, yet we still cannot FULLY understand them. It is exceedingly more important that I be careful in meditating on the nature of the Father/Son relationship of God seeing that I am mere flesh and am not yet a party to that relationship. It is the whole council of God that will bring the fullest understanding.
This is way over my paygrade, but I believe that we cannot get this 'right' (though we can obviously grow closer to a more full understanding). I believe the very last idol to be smashed among even the Very Elect of God will be their own personal mental (not necessarily Theological) conception/understanding of God. Until then, I want to grow in understanding, but never build an altar to my own understanding of God.
I'm watching the thread with interest, but I don't want to get into a debate...especially since I believe in "Omni-Wrongness" (especially my own) when it comes to this.
Akira329:
How can anything be born if the means of birth aren't first created?
Jesus came out of God?
Wasn't it all a process??
How does this question his deity? or whether or not he is worthy to be praised?
Didn't Ray cover this quite extensively in his trinity paper and the Nashville conference??
I'm surprised at the questions that appear on here sometimes?
Its like we don't read the material at all.
Besides I believe Ray will tackle this topic in the upcoming conference so till then......
Antaiwan
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version