SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Evan Roberts Quote
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 )




The difference is between 'incarnational' and 'eternal' Sonship of Christ. Incarnational Sonship denies the person of Christ as Son for all eternity, and only has the son of God coming on the scene at some point around the incarnation. The entire work of the Son of God in creation must be denied, as well as the rest of the work of the Son of God thoughout the OT at least.

Damnable heresies deny either the person or the work of Christ, incarnational Sonship denies both.

JIG isn't going to hear from me so I will leave it in your hands for a bit, and see where it goes.


 2012/1/14 2:05


Damnable heresies deny either the person or the work of Christ, incarnational Sonship denies both.

That is not true in the slightest. There is virtually no difference between "the work of Christ" with conception-Sonship. HE is still The WORD of GOD, Creator GOD, The Lamb of GOD, our Savior, The Word of GOD that returns to earth in Rev 19.
Your own words again. Read my signature & sign-on name - they've been there long enough.
I have nothing more to say to you Joe, because as I've said - if there is no man here that you considered a Brother - why should I not expect you to behave any differently toward a sister that you've targeted to add to your list of the unsaved. You cannot undo what Christ has done in their lives nor mine.


Pilgrim, I 'asked' to be corrected on another thread and not as a challenge, but asked for Scriptural reasons why I should not see what many other scholars have seen.

Thank you for correcting my error in typing out my words - Amen!, He did Not act autonomously while in our form - to be our example of how to walk with GOD.

This is from that post, though not the exhaustive list of what I've studied by myself ...

Quote: I'm stuck on the tenses of these verses -

Act 13:33 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."

Heb 1:5,6 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, "this day" have I begotten thee? And again, I "will be" to Him a Father, and He "shall be" to me a Son? And again, "when" He bringeth in the "firstbegotten" into the world, He saith, And let all the angels of God worship Him.

Heb 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, "to day" have I begotten thee.

Psa 2:7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; "this day" have I begotten thee.

Psa 89:26,27 He "shall" cry unto me, Thou art my father, my God, and the rock of my salvation. Also "I 'will' make" him [my] "firstborn", higher than the kings of the earth.

Also these two, for Who I believe He is, in Eternity past and Eternity future -

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Rev 19:13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and His name is called The Word of God.

I could very well discuss this with my Pastor - a very scholarly man down south - but I 'thought' since OJ brought it up and no one else had corrected me - that he could - with Scripture.

Thank you again for doing this the right way. Grateful!

 2012/1/14 10:24


That is not true in the slightest. There is virtually no difference between "the work of Christ" with conception-Sonship. HE is still The WORD of GOD, Creator GOD, The Lamb of GOD, our Savior, The Word of GOD that returns to earth in Rev 19.

"VIRTUALLY" is a really big word there. You will have Christ to be anything BUT the Son of God. The problem is right here:

"Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also."

You deny the Son as being the Son. This comes not from the Holy Spirit.


 2012/1/14 10:48

Joined: 2011/9/30
Posts: 1211


Ok, I think I see what is happening here.

It is certainly interesting regarding all the variations and controversies throughout Christian history that has attended Jesus Christ and sought to become Christian thought.

Before I continue, I just want to give everyone (by way of education) a brief rundown on numerous thoughts about Jesus Christ.

1. The Docetists denied that Jesus was really human, claiming that He only appeared (dokein) to be human with a phantom-like, illusory body.

2. The Ebionites denied that Jesus was divine, claiming that He was simply the natural son of Joseph and Mary who assumed and adopted the "Son of God" title at His baptism.

3. The Arians denied that Jesus was eternally God, claiming that Jesus was created by God prior to the creation of the world.

4. The Apollinarians questioned the deity of Christ, claiming that Jesus had a human body and soul but was invested with the divine Logos to replace His human spirit.

5. The Nestorians posited that Jesus was really two persons in one with a schizoid dual-personality in sympathetic union with one another.

6. The Eutychians claimed that the divine and human substances were merged to form a third compound nature that was not really divine or human.

And more such variations and controversies of explaining how Jesus could be the God-man continue to this day.


Would you say your belief falls into category number 3 or possible no category above at all and maybe a newer variation. Do you believe that He actually came into existence as the Son of God at His human birth? Is that what you mean by the verses that talk about Him being "begotten"?

I am still kind of in my exploratory stage of gathering information so that I CLEARLY know where you are coming from.

And also, to understand clearly where Old_Joe is coming from, I will have to go and read his links.

So, please indulge me and don't take any offense as I am still trying to understand exactly what you and Joe believe. Otherwise, it would be unfair of me to lay out what I think the Scriptures are saying. Fair enough?

I will probably have to ask Old_Joe some questions, too.

Thanks so much, Jesus-is-God, and have a great day.


 2012/1/14 11:01Profile


ETA - I wrote this before I saw Joe and Pilgrim's new posts above - that they posted 'while' I was typing this ...

I'd like to add, Pilgrim, or any others that have studied this out from Scripture -

I was studying the Scriptures above and through-out the O.T. to 'know' Him and understand The Three-in-One and could not find the One Who we call the second person of the GODHEAD in the same submissive role that He took upon Himself while in the flesh as Immanuel - but found, as the Shema states, The LORD our GOD, He is One LORD - though we know from Genesis one - that GOD is Tripartite... Let "us" make man in our image, etc..
That's why it was difficult to witness to the Jewish people and I needed to explain ONE GOD versus how we explain 'the trinity' in our Christian language - but from the Old Testament. Isaiah 53 is great for beginning a conversation with Jewish folks - but the questions continue after that opener.

The Theophanies, I believe were Who we know as Christ Jesus or Immanuel since His conception - but to sit with a Jewish person and go through the O.T. and prove out Who Jesus is and refute "the 3 Gods" belief that they think that we hold to ... it takes a lot of Old Testament knowledge to explain the Co-Equality - because as they also do believe Messiah 'will' come and rule the earth - the see it as The GOD of the O.T. - and we know that HE IS, but ... well --- someone here may know what they'd ask from there, from their Book.

In Peter, we read that it was the "Spirit of Christ within them" that gave the O.T. prophets the words that they spoke.

In the Garden, as I asked, Who walked and talked with Adam?

When reading the Old Testament from cover to cover - Where do we differeniate with the 'equality' of the Three-in-One?
That was my search through-out when desiring to see all of His Fulness.
I see One GOD - Co-Equal - GOD Who is Spirit, His Word and His Spirit and find that The Word of GOD, that is GOD and was 'with' GOD and yet did all things AS GOD in the O.T. - unlike when He emptied Himself and became man and subservient to Him that sent Him.

As an example of what O.T. verses - though I'm truly considering the Entire O.T. - I asked myself - WHO is "speaking" in just this one verse ... Psa 99:7 He spake unto them in the cloudy pillar: they kept His testimonies, and the ordinance that He gave them.

I believe whenever HE speaks, it is The Three in One and equally included in that is The Word of GOD Who was later made flesh and dwelt among His Creation in the flesh.

Besides the tenses in those few verses above and others - the O.T. descriptions of GOD are all equal - except in the sense where the 'future tense' comes in, as in where HE [the Three-in-One] states that "My Servant 'shall' ..." - stated in the future tense - when His Servant 'shall be' 'sent' ... Isaiah 52 & 53. As well as when Christ is called "the Branch" in the O.T.. When GOD [future tense in the O.T.] becomes man.

"GOD our Saviour" in N.T. verses.

Just needed to add these thoughts, because my study began with the Old Testament - looking for the One we know now as "Jesus", that will return in Rev 19 with a New Name.

The Triune GODHead cannot contradict the Shema, when we're witnessing to Israel and we should be doing just that.

Thanks again all, for bearing with this.

 2012/1/14 11:14


Joe wrote: """Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also."

You deny the Son as being the Son. This comes not from the Holy Spirit."""

Either you like lying, false accusations or you truly do not know what you are saying.

The Son of GOD is our Savior.

I can't talk with the irrational or false accusers anymore.

 2012/1/14 11:18

Joined: 2011/9/30
Posts: 1211


Thanks for that Jesus-is-God.

Please don't forget to answer my latest questions. Maybe you have not read my latest.


 2012/1/14 11:20Profile


Oh Pilgrim. How could you ask any of those questions. My GOD, they are blasphemous and anyone that's known me since I first came to SI could have answered that question for you.

No more. I won't have The Word of GOD dragged through the dirt like this.

I asked the wrong person to "staighten me out" last night, if he felt I was in that degree of error that he claimed made me unfit to be saved. I've never regretted asking for help before in my life, but so painfully do now.
I see what this is turning into and it's degrading HIM "The WORD of GOD, not me.

Have a great time today as well, Pilgrim.

 2012/1/14 11:28

Joined: 2011/9/30
Posts: 1211


I'm sorry if you took it that way. I now see from your latest that you are not talking about Arianism. You believe the Son is eternally pre-existent but your disagreement with Old_Joe is that he believes the Son did everything in the OT and you are just saying that God as the 3-in-1 did everything in the OT. Is that better?

That is the only differentiation between you and Old_Joe.

Am I getting it now?


 2012/1/14 11:31Profile


You'd have to ask Joe.

This thread that I started in 2005 explains 'everything' that I believe about "JESUS" ....

It will save us all a lot of talk and misunderstanding about Who He is, as many beautiful Saints contributed to that thread.


 2012/1/14 11:48

Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy