Poster | Thread |
| Re: | | David
What you wrote is all true, but since it is a revealed doctrine do not expect JIG or her new "friend" to see it. The new friend is also a proponent of justification by works since it too 'appears' to be presented in scripture and has also been disputed throughout time.
Fools always mock at the high things of God because they cannot reach them. Best just to let JIG and her new friend play, this will be sorted out for them both at the end.
1 Corinthians 11:19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
OJ |
| 2012/1/15 9:52 | | davidc Member
Joined: 2010/8/15 Posts: 272 France
| Re: Eternal Sonship | | PrimaDogma, I am not writing in order to cause offence, but because JIG asked for scriptures about this truth; this I have done, but no one has yet provided scriptures proving the incarnational Sonship.
You say " 2) The Bible clearly teaches Incarnational Sonship." Perhaps you could come off the fence and say where for all our edification.
Meanwhile, more from John's gospel as promised. Chapter 3 Joh 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
The Son of Man also is eternal. v 13. God sent his Son into the world.v 17;
Chapter 5
Joh 5:23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. Joh 5:23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. Joh 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
The Father sent Him v23. and 24.
Chapter 6
Joh 6:38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. Joh 6:39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. Joh 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
The Father sent the Son to do His will v39.
Chapter 7
Joh 7:28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not. Joh 7:29 But I know him: for I am from him, and he hath sent me.
What could be more clear? They know where He comes from, and that the Father sent Him from there. v28. Jesus says clearly that He has come from God. v29
Chapter 8
Joh 8:38 I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.
Clearly, He has been with His Father from eternity, and the love and grace He has seen there, that He speaks.
There is much more, but I desist. Some have said that the eternality of the Sonship is not important. Some doctrines can be seen as error and need prayer and guidance into all truth. Any doctrine however which questions the Person or character of our Lord Jesus Christ must and will be challenged. This false doctrine is such and if accepted, will lead to more error, and departing from the Lord. So scripture please
David _________________ david
|
| 2012/1/15 10:36 | Profile | PrimaDogma Member
Joined: 2010/3/27 Posts: 49
| Re: | | Reeves quoted at least 10,000 verses in support of this doctrine in the link JiG provided.
And what does it matter? People make the Bible say whatever they want it to say. |
| 2012/1/15 12:47 | Profile | PrimaDogma Member
Joined: 2010/3/27 Posts: 49
| Re: | | //Best just to let JIG and her new friend play, this will be sorted out for them both at the end.//
You mean on Judgment Day the Almighty is really going to let us have it! "Depart from me, ye cursed ones, into everlasting fire, for you came down on the wrong side of the Eternal Sonship doctrine!" |
| 2012/1/15 12:49 | Profile |
| Re: | | David, I Do appreciate you posting Scripture. I always appreciate that - and every Scripture that you posted is TRUE 100%.
Those that have merely differed on "when" The Word of GOD was "made The Son" - as in "this day have I begotten Thee" - seems to have time and date. That one verses is written 4 times, Old and New testament. As I posted a few verses with 'tenses' earlier, Hebrews says, "I 'will be' a Father and He 'shall be' My Son".
And they look to find Who Jesus was through-out the Old Testament - and see wherever the Messiah is mentioned, it's 'future tense'.
They believe He is The Son of GOD as much as any of us here do... it's just a question of when He became subservient "to The Father" ... it was at a certain date and time ... "Today" other verses include.
We may not agree with those who have looked into when that "time" was that they see that implies "a day" - but they agree with every Scripture verse that you or probably anyone else would post - but no man has yet to explain fully what the 'tenses' of those verses indicate - as they do indeed point to "a time".
I'm not challenging anyone's belief or have ever asked that anyone believe incarnational-sonship, but to damn those who have either researched it to understand the 'time' factor in those verses and The Word of GOD's role through-out the Old Testament - and again, probably would have just sat back and at the most - Thank anyone that would take the time to give Scripture to this question - but to question anyone's Salvation over this - when they are in full agreement that He is The Son of GOD - that's why I've responded, only.
In my searches on the Net and on other forums, I've found some that insist "the time" was at His Baptism and then another group believe that it was at His Resurrection.... but other than those two quirkie beliefs - I find no fault in their other foundational doctrines. Strange. Those are the three camps that I've found on the Net - though there may be another that believes "the time" was on the Mount of transfiguration. Regardless - they all certainly DO "believe in The Father and The Son".
All believing He 'is' The Son of GOD that did nothing without The Father while here on earth as Immanuel. And believe every other N.T. Scripture just as you or any one of us would on Soteriology, etc.. Salvation by faith in The Son - etc..
I'll stick my neck out again and say that I've even met a few "Oneness doctrine" folks that I could never judge their Salvation, though on the thread I posted earlier on this thread - you'll see where I tried very hard to dissuade his thinking with a mile long post+ proving out the Three-in-One on pg 5 of that thread and further on to almost the end of that thread. I believe some of that persuasion, are merely confused by those who taught them but if they'd look for themselves, they'd see The Three-in-One, sure enough.
I'm not one to quickly judge anyone's Salvation and plan to never-ever be. I fear that more than any other transactions that I have with humans.
Only those that are dead - like Hitler - I can say - Yes, they're in Hell. Death bed repentence is open to just about everyone.
This is one doctrine - "incarnational or eternal" that I do not feel is a Salvation issue. But do feel and fear in my own heart that, judging other's Salvation can be. Judging doctrine or manifestations - yes, we're told to do so - but judging Salvation - I can't and will not.
Otherwise - 'Thank you' again for coming to the call for the Scriptural replies I had hoped to receive.
In Christ,
Ann |
| 2012/1/15 13:10 | |
| Re: | | More problems with person of the Son of God are displayed here.
Quote:
it's just a question of when He became subservient "to The Father" ... it was at a certain date and time
None of us believe that, that is the heresy of subordinationism defined below.
"The heresy of Subordinationism originated in the first century and teaches that son of God (Christ) and the Holy Spirit are not co-equal with God the Father, but are subordinate to Him, with some also holding to the subordination of the Holy Spirit to Christ. This in essence destroys the unity of the singular Godhead making lesser gods of the Son and the Holy Spirit."
The Son of God is co-equal and co-eternal with both the Father and the Holy Spirit.
OJ
|
| 2012/1/15 13:51 | | Giggles Member
Joined: 2009/12/12 Posts: 592
| Re: | | Prima, you're back! Your old name eludes me, but I remember the righteousness of Christ thread from way back where you provided ample comic relief--ahem, solemn and necessary commentary.
Enjoy your work but, as the scripture tells us often to remember, remember what happened to you last time!
_________________ Paul
|
| 2012/1/15 13:56 | Profile |
| Re: | | Quote:
Only those that are dead - like Hitler - I can say - Yes, they're in Hell.
BTW have you ever read "War and Grace"? Three of Hitler's highest ranking officers are in heaven. Food for thought....
OJ |
| 2012/1/15 13:56 | |
| Re: | | Quote:
More problems with person of the Son of God are displayed here.
Quote:
it's just a question of when He became subservient "to The Father" ... it was at a certain date and time
None of us believe that, that is the heresy of subordinationism defined below.
"The heresy of Subordinationism originated in the first century and teaches that son of God (Christ) and the Holy Spirit are not co-equal with God the Father, but are subordinate to Him, with some also holding to the subordination of the Holy Spirit to Christ. This in essence destroys the unity of the singular Godhead making lesser gods of the Son and the Holy Spirit."
The Son of God is co-equal and co-eternal with both the Father and the Holy Spirit.
OJ
Joe, How many times, since I've been here, have I stressed Co-Equality? Even on my recent reply to White_Stone, on pg 1 of this thread.
He emptied Himself and became wholly dependent on The Father - though He is also called Immanuel.
You are trying so hard to "damn" a Sister in Christ - that you aren't even reading posts, or hoping that others haven't.
Many here have read that thread I linked to this thread - because they were here back then and are seeing and knowing that with you - it's just a personal agenda behind the attacks.
We got along fine last year until I began to quote the N.T. Commandments and you didn't agree - so from that day on - I've been your target. Since last year, Joe - it's been sad.
|
| 2012/1/15 14:12 | |
| Re: | | Joe, if you click on my 'profile' - what is written there - has been there since early 2009.
{eta} the thread I mentioned again, is the last post on pg 2, in case you've missed it. Everything I believe about Christ is in that one thread.
Love ya, Joe. |
| 2012/1/15 14:26 | |
|