SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Trinity and TD Jakes

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 )
PosterThread
ReceivedText
Member



Joined: 2005/4/22
Posts: 257
Seattle, Washington, USA

 Re:

Quote:
Question #1: What passage that speaks/proves that Jesus has no beginning?



Answer: Specifically in Micah 5:2 "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; [b]whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.[/b]"

Quote:
Question #2: Any thought on "begotten Son" in John 3:16?



Answer: Begotten by simple definition has to do with physical birth. We read in Gal. 4:4 that the Son was "made" of a woman. We read in Rom. 1:3 that Jesus Christ the Son was "made of the seed of David according to the flesh;"

Adam was a created son of God. The Word was "made flesh" and dwelt among us. I love these words taken from the (non-Biblical) epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus:

[b]"This is He who was from the beginning, who appeared as if new, and was found old, and yet who is ever born afresh in the hearts of the saints."[/b]

Isn't that just beautiful? God's Word is His Son which was begotten in the flesh in the fullness of time, yet by Him were all things created. Great is the mystery of godliness. God was manifest in the flesh. (1 Tim. 3:16 - encourage you to read the whole verse - KJV)

Quote:
Question #3: Is there anywhere in the Bible that calls the Spirit of God as God?



One quick place I can recall is in Acts 5:3,

(v. 3) "But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to [b]lie to the Holy Ghost[/b], and to keep back part of the price of the land?"
(v. 4) "Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? [b]thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.[/b]" (emphasis added)

Quote:
Question #4: What's wrong in not calling the Holy Spirit as God but calling it as Spirit of God as the Bible calls it?



I want to point you to these references where the pronoun "he" (John 14:16,17) as well as "it" (Rom. 8:16) are used. We read of: Comforter, Spirit of Truth, Holy Ghost, Spirit of God, Spirit of the Lord, to name a few. I'd go to your Bible and do a study on your own. This will probably serve you best.

1 John 5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

Hope this helps clear things up. If not let me know. Its getting pretty late.

Blessings,

RT

 2005/6/23 4:33Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

There is some stuff here that new folks, who missed this topic the last time around, might profit from.

[url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=1783&forum=36&start=30&viewmode=flat&order=0]Should we believe the Trinity?[/url]
and in [url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=3962&forum=36&post_id=&refresh=Go]The Word became Flesh.[/url]
and in [url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=445&forum=36&post_id=&refresh=Go]The Trinity/Oneness Question.[/url]
and in [url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=184&forum=36&post_id=&refresh=Go]The Trinity - what are your views?[/url]
and in [url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=242&forum=36&post_id=&refresh=Go]Trinity and Hebrew Grammar[/url]


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/6/23 10:42Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

roman asks:

Quote:
Question #1: What passage that speaks/proves that Jesus has no beginning?



The Gospel according to John has some profound christology. It begans by declaring that in the 'beginning' the Word already was. (This is a conscious echo of Genesis 1:1) This is the imperfect tense signifying a past-continuous characteristic or action. The same word and tense is then used of the Word which John declares 'was with God'. This is a fascinating construction. Greek has different words for 'with' e.g. meta=together with, para=with/by the side of. But this is 'pros ton theon' which really implies 'towards, with a sense of motion, God'. This speaks not of a sterile time/space positioning but of a living relationship. It almost gives the sense of God and the Word being in increasing intimacy. You will see that God and the Word at this point are distinguishable and are portrayed as being in a 'face to face' relationship. (the phrase is repeated at the end of verse 2) It goes on to use that same imperfect tense form of 'was' to say that the Word was God; this is indivisibility.

In John 1:1 you have the following christology
1. The Word co-existed with God at the beginning; that is co-equality.
2. The Word was distinguishable and in a definable relationship to God; that is unique personhood.
3. The Word was indivisible from God; that is monotheism.
4. The whole is tri-unity. Distinguishable persons living in a non-divisible one-ness.

If the Son was already co-existing with the Father 'at the beginning' it can only mean that He had no beginning.


{The essence of the following is quoted by William D Mounce in 'Basics of Biblical Greek' 2nd Edition; page 27. He is quoting, in turn, from Daniel B Wallace.] In English the order of the words determines the meaning. eg 'the dog bit the boy' can only mean one thing. However in Biblical greek the meaning is usually determined by the 'case endings' of the words. In the above example the ending of the word 'dog' would show the this was the subject of the sentence, and the ending of the word 'boy' would show that this was the object of the sentence. Consequently, in Biblical Greek the word order might be 'the boy bit the dog' but the case endings of the nouns would make it crystal clear that it was the dog that did the biting. The order of the words in Biblical Greek is not primarily to convey meaning but emphasis. So eg in our illustration if the full story was 'a boy and a girl were playing with a dog; the boy bit the dog'. If the case ending showed that 'the dog' was the subject then this would have the effect of saying "both were playing with the dog, but the dog bit the boy". However in a sentence like 'god was the word' something else gives us the meaning. In these "equation" statements eg "the dog is an animal" the same case ending would be used for both; the nominative. This would make it impossible to know who bit whom, but the Greeks had a way around that too. The subject noun would be given the definite article 'the'. Now the word order of the sentance can be used to give the required emphasis but we can still identify the subject. The Greek for John 1:1 is "and god was the word". This is an "equation sentance" so how can we know which is the subject? Easy, the subject has the definite article. So why not write "the word was God"? Because the writer wants to emphasize something else. It is a way of saying "what God was, the Word was". The lack of the definite article stops us from identifying the person of 'the Word'(Jesus) with the person of 'God' (the Father). The word order tells us that the Word has all the divine attributes of the Father; the word order tells us that the 'the Word' is not 'the Father'. Martin Luther once wrote that the lack of the definite article disproves Sabellianism and the word order disproves Arianism. Here's a little more Bible algebra. If it had said

"and the Word was the God"-> Sabellianism (Jesus-Only/Oneness)
"and the Word was a god"-> Arianism (and JWs etc)
"and god was the Word"-> orthodox trinitarian.
Biblical Greek is capable of almost mathematical precision.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/6/23 11:01Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy