SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
See Opportunities to Serve with SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Is the denial of the eternal Sonship of Christ a damnable heresy?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re:

Taco

Let's look at the verse again.

  Isaiah 9:6   For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

'His name shall be called' is very different than 'He shall be'


If Jesus Christ is 'King of kings' how then may he be relegated to being only the 'PRINCE of peace'? This would be a complete contradiction of titles if we took them both as being who/what He is.

The reality is that He is 'called' by these names because of who/what He represents. Just like the plumb line in Amos. I could start up a whole carpenter's religion that centrally worships Christ as a physical plumbline based on a false understanding of this concept. That would be something for Wayneman to explore elsewhere.


OJ

 2012/1/20 13:35









 Re:

More that state that Origen was the origin ...

Trinitarian author: Walter R. Martin - From his book, The Kingdom of the Cults, in his chapter on the “Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower” (chapter 4, 1977 rev. ed.), we read:

Arius derived many of his ideas from his teacher, Lucian of Antioch, who in turn borrowed them from Origen, who himself introduced the term “eternal generation” or the concept that God from all eternity generates a second person like Himself, ergo the “eternal Son.” Arius of course rejected this as illogical and unreasonable, which it is, and taking the other horn of dilemma squarely between his teeth reduced the eternal Word of God to the rank of a creation! It is a significant fact, however, that in the earliest writings of the church fathers doting from the first century to the year 230 the term “eternal generation” was never used, but it has been this dogma later adopted by Roman Catholic theology, which has fed the Arian heresy through the centuries and today continues to feed the Christology of the Jehovah’s Witnesses."

(pp. 101, 102—1977; pp. 115, 116—1985 rev. ed.; p. 168—1997 rev., updated, expanded anniversary ed., Hank Hanegraaff, general editor; pp. 137, 138—2003 rev., updated, expanded ed., Ravi Zacharias, general editor.)



"The Bible clearly teaches, then, that Jesus Christ before His incarnation was the eternal Word, Wisdom, or Logos, of God…and further, that Jesus Christ is not called by Scripture the “eternal Son,” the error passed on from Origen under the title “eternal generation,” but rather He is the Living Word of God…Let us fix these things in our minds then: (a) the doctrine of “eternal generation” or the eternal Sonship of Christ, which springs from the Roman Catholic doctrine first conceived by Origen in A.D. 230, is a theory which opened the door theologically to the Arian and Sabellian heresies which today still plague the Christian Church in the realms of Christology.

(b) The Scripture nowhere calls Jesus Christ the eternal Son of God, and He is never called Son at all prior to the incarnation, except in prophetic passages in the Old Testament…

(d) Many heresies have seized upon the confusion created by the illogical “eternal Sonship” or “eternal generation” theory of Roman Catholic theology, unfortunately carried over to some aspects of Protestant theology."

(pp. 102, 103—1977; pp. 116, 117—1985; pp. 169, 170—1997 rev., updated, expanded anniversary ed., Hank Hanegraaff, general editor [with minor additions and deletions]; pp. 138, 139—2003 rev., updated, expanded ed., Ravi Zacharias, general editor [with minor additions and deletions].)

------------------------------------------------------------

Taco - I believe you'll find the answer to your question in Rev 21:1-'7' for "the father of who?"

------------------------------------------------------------

eta - Re: at the time of Rev 21 ...


1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

From Adam Clarke:

1Co 15:28
The Son also himself be subject - When the administration of the kingdom of grace is finally closed; when there shall be no longer any state of probation, and consequently no longer need of a distinction between the kingdom of grace and the kingdom of glory; then the Son, as being man and Messiah, shall cease to exercise any distinct dominion and God be all in all: there remaining no longer any distinction in the persons of the glorious Trinity, as acting any distinct or separate parts in either the kingdom of grace, or the kingdom of glory, and so the one infinite essence shall appear undivided and eternal. And yet, as there appears to be a personality essentially in the infinite Godhead, that personality must exist eternally; but how this shall be we can neither tell nor know till that time comes in which we shall See Him as He Is. 1Jo_3:2.


John Wesley - 1Co 15:28 The Son also shall be subject - Shall deliver up the mediatorial kingdom. That the three - one God may be all in all - All things, (consequently all persons,) without any interruption, without the intervention of any creature, without the opposition of any enemy, shall be subordinate to God. All shall say, "My God, and my all." This is the end. Even an inspired apostle can see nothing beyond this.

 2012/1/20 21:39









 Re:

There is no safety in numbers ma'am, but good news, after being so sure that it wasn't true Walter Martin sure seems to have changed his mind as seen below. And we are thankful for that.

Wesley plainly declares Christ as the eternal Son of God as well. Adam Clarke, well, he has other issues....


http://www.waltermartin.com/sof.html


"The Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ

The Lord Jesus Christ is the eternal Son of God. The Scriptures declare:
His virgin birth (Matt. 1:23; Luke 1:31, 35)
His sinless life (Heb. 7:26; 1 Peter 2:22)
His miracles (Acts 2:22; 10:38)
His substitutionary work on the cross (1 Cor. 15:3; 2 Cor. 5:21)
His bodily resurrection from the dead (Matt. 28:6; Luke 24:39; 1 Cor. 15:4)
His exaltation to the right hand of God (Acts 1:9, 11; 2:33; Phil. 2:9-11; Heb. 1-3)"

And again

http://www.waltermartin.com/articles.html#doctrine

" 6. Creation. Although the Bible does not explain to us how the three persons are the one God, it tells us most emphatically that the Spirit of God created the world (Gen. 1:2), the Father created the world (Heb. 1:2), and the Son created the world (Col. 1:16). If you check the creation references in the New Testament, you will see that these particular references are bolstered by several others teaching the same things. "

After earlier mayhem, he ended preaching eternal sonship, that's an awesome repentance (change of mind)!

How about you??

OJ

 2012/1/21 2:05









 Re:

from the very bottom of your link ....

"Copyright 1999-2003 by the General Council of the Assemblies of God."

The book that I quoted from is still on that site for sale.

In what year did Walter Martin go Home to the LORD? I truly don't remember.



I've been reading some of these verses and still "thinking" ...

Gen 17:1 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD 'appeared' to Abram, and said unto him, 'I am the Almighty God'; walk before me, and be thou perfect.

Exodus Chpt 3 and

Exo 6:2,3 And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD: and I 'appeared' unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

Etc Theophanies.


Also was reading the O.T. Prophets - how they only saw One GOD on the Throne and what they saw was much of what John did, as only One on the Throne in the Rev.

I need to 'study' lots more out of the O.T., as I said - I have neighbors to explain things to.


[eta]Yes, I know what John Wesley believed and I love that man but what you don't understand is what he was saying about 1Co 15:28 - the same as what Clarke was saying of what will be "when all things shall be subdued unto Him"... ie Rev 21.





How about you - have you met any "Brothers" here as yet? :)


Take Care.

 2012/1/21 4:32
PrimaDogma
Member



Joined: 2010/3/27
Posts: 49


 Re: Is the denial of the eternal Sonship of Christ a damnable heresy?

Old Joe,

I approve of this Middletown Bible Church. Independent Fundamentalist KJV-only Biblical-Separation Baptists are the only True Christians. Anyone who disagrees is causing division in the Body of Christ.

 2012/1/21 7:30Profile









 Re:

"Independent Fundamentalist KJV-only Biblical-Separation Baptists are the only True Christians. Anyone who disagrees is causing division in the Body of Christ."
PrimaDogma

A summary, by geographical area and type of publication, of the number of different languages and dialects in which publication of at least one book of the Bible has been registered as of December 31, 2002.

2,287....http://www.biblica.com/bibles/faq/19/

That of course, is world-wide, and it is 10 years old. These are all non-King James of course, translated into languages like Swahili, and Mandarin.

The Baptists [ Anabaptist's ] got going in about 1525, with their belief system retracting to the roots of the reformation...[ 1516 ]..long before the KJV edition was first written. I hope that some of these believers were saved.

Anabaptist history:http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/1985/issue5/520.html

Before then, of course, were 1500 years of Christianity evident on every continent...with many different flavors, and devotional fervor among the believers. Their creed was to love Jesus, the family of God and the World, and to live a holy life in the Holy Spirit following Jesus as Lord.

There were, of course heresies, which actually means division, or dividers, who demanded that their belief systems were the only ones to be obeyed. Sometimes they even murdered other believers who disagreed. This can be called cultish; just like your faith statement.

Also, as it is today in some places, people are illiterate, and must believe the preached Word solely.

If you are born again, and possess His Holy Spirit, I suggest you "get out of the box", so to speak, and see the body of Christ as God does...because by cutting off as many souls as you do, you may be found to be cutting off Christ Himself.

One body, One faith, One Baptism, One Lord...unto all in the World.



 2012/1/21 10:06









 Re:

Quote:
from the very bottom of your link ....

"Copyright 1999-2003 by the General Council of the Assemblies of God."

The book that I quoted from is still on that site for sale.

In what year did Walter Martin go Home to the LORD? I truly don't remember.



I didn't come here to defend the man ma'am. I endeavor not to defend the reputation of any man, especially my own, at the expense of Christ, who says of us at this time, "thou sayest thou art rich and knowest not...."

You may defend men, but I must only defend Christ, and Him alone, at the expense of what any other may think of myself.

OJ

 2012/1/21 10:58









 Re:

Quote:

Old Joe,

I approve of this Middletown Bible Church. Independent Fundamentalist KJV-only Biblical-Separation Baptists are the only True Christians. Anyone who disagrees is causing division in the Body of Christ.



Here is a quote for you from my site

"There may be some of Christ's Bride still amongst the various visible churches and denominations, but there will not be many of His Bride in any particular church or denomination."

OJ

 2012/1/21 11:03









 Re:

That said:

The title "Son of Man" deals with the temporal incarnational nature of Christ, the title "Son of God" deals with the eternal sonship nature of Christ.

To deny the eternal sonship of Christ is to deny the Son, period. Doesn't matter if Walter Martin did it, or if anyone else does it, in doing so, they deny the Son of God.

This is kind of like arguing that Jesus Christ is God with a JW, they have all kinds of arguments, supporters and "proof texts' to go with their denial of His true nature, but as stated before, this is a revealed doctrine to which no amount of 'proof' will suffice to those who refuse to believe it. There has NEVER been enough proof for unbelief, so it will now be up to you to deal with the eternal Son of God on this matter....


OJ

 2012/1/21 11:58









 Re:

Quote:
To deny the eternal sonship of Christ is to deny the Son, period.




This is not true and coming from the man that said that he cannot call or consider any man here "Brother" - I have to consider the source and have turned this over to those that are Brothers and that do 'love' in sincerity, so please see that you're not the final authority, for once.
Lee, you need to get over yourself and love everyone here and stop judging everyone's salvation.
Joh 8:36 If the 'Son' therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
He does Love you, Lee, but you've got to know that you're not the only man here that He loves & has saved.

Have a Nice weekend in Him.
Sincerely.

 2012/1/21 13:09





©2002-2021 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy