what I learned about oneness pentecostalism

[Nameaboveallnames]

I believe Jesus is God and the Trinity.

May I ask what you mean when you say that you believe Jesus is the Trinity? Are you saying that you believe he is all three "persons" (for lack of a better word) in the Trinity or that he is just one "member" (again, for lack of a better word) of the Trinity?

Since I am new here, let me openly state that I fully believe in Jesus' divinity, even though he was not given the name "Jesus" until the time of his incarnation. As I just alluded to, I also fully believe that Jesus took humanity upon himself approximately two thousand years ago or that he now has a dual nature.

P.S.

I also fully believe in a triune Godhead or Trinity, but my understanding of the same might differ from the opinions of others.

 

[Nameaboveallnames]

If I am going to enter the pool, figurative speaking, then I might as well just do a cannonball.

Although I fully believe that the one we now call "Jesus" (he wasn't given that name until the time of his incarnation) has been God or divine from eternity past, I do not believe that he has always been "the Son of God." Instead, I believe that he became the Son of God at the time of his incarnation, or I believe in what is called "Incarnational Sonship." I definitely do not believe that Jesus has always been "God the Son," terminology which never appears in scripture, nor do I believe that he was "eternally begotten," which is a self-contradictory term, as is alleged in The Nicene Creed. If anybody wants to discuss the reasons behind my stated beliefs civilly, then I am down for some polite conversation. Whatever you do, please don't assume that you know why I believe what I believe without simply asking me to explain my beliefs. Thank you.

 

[Scott Downey]

I just read your back and forth with Verily, and I see the reason for the disconnect between the two of you. The word "begotten," when used in scripture, has more than one meaning. It can mean to "beget" as in procreation, like we see in the genealogies in Genesis chapter 5, and that is obviously the meaning that you are applying to it. However, the terms “begotten” (Psa. 2:7, Acts 13:33, Heb. 1:5, 5:5), “only begotten” (John 1:14, 18, 3:16, 18, 1 John 4:9), and “first-begotten” (Heb. 1:6, Rev. 1:5) are used eleven times in the Bible in relation to Jesus Christ, and they always refer to the specific day in which he was raised from the dead. This is obviously the meaning that Verily is applying to that word.

Eternally begotten, not made, as in the Son was always in the bosom of the Father

John 1
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

15 John bore witness of Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me [f]is preferred before me, for He was before me.’ ”

16 [g]And of His fullness we have all received, and grace for grace. 17 For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten [h]Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.

Why Does It Matter That Christ Was ‘Begotten, Not Made’?

The Nicene Creed speaks of Jesus as “begotten, not made.” What does that mean, and why does it matter?

www.desiringgod.org

The text itself pushes us to the conclusion that the peculiar kind of begetting that we’re talking about is an eternal begetting. There never was a time when the Son did not exist, and yet he is Son and not Father. They’re not reversible ever in the New Testament. And the Christian church is right to argue that it is fitting to speak of this eternally existent Son who is God, and yet who is not the Father. He has been eternally begotten by the Father, not coming into being but eternally begotten.

“There is no salvation without the deity of Christ.”

So, the point stressed, both biblically and confessionally, is that the eternal begetting of the Son secures the Son’s very same, exact nature with the Father. That’s the point of Hebrews 1:3: “He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature.” Or Philippians 2:6: “Though he was in the form of God, [he] did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped.”

 

[Nameaboveallnames]

Eternally begotten, not made, as in the Son was always in the bosom of the Father

John 1
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

15 John bore witness of Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me [f]is preferred before me, for He was before me.’ ”

16 [g]And of His fullness we have all received, and grace for grace. 17 For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten [h]Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.

Hey, Scott.

The term “eternally begotten” is not only self-contradictory, but it also does not appear anywhere in scripture. Instead, the terms “begotten” (Psa. 2:7, Acts 13:33, Heb. 1:5, 5:5), “only begotten” (John 1:14, 18, 3:16, 18, 1 John 4:9), and “first-begotten” (Heb. 1:6, Rev. 1:5) appear eleven times in the Bible in relation to Jesus Christ, and they always refer to the specific day in which he was raised from the dead. Seeing how the first reference is found in Psalm 2:7, and seeing how that verse is quoted and properly interpreted for us three times in the New Testament, let us begin there by examining that verse in its proper context to see how the term “begotten” truly applies to Jesus Christ in the Bible.

“Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.” (Psa. 2:1-3)

The first three verses of this prophetic messianic psalm (Luke 24:44) foretold of the time when the Roman soldiers, the people of Israel, King Herod, and Pontius Pilate conspired together to crucify Jesus Christ. This is by no means my own “private interpretation” (2 Pet. 1:20), but, instead, it is the plain teaching of scripture.

“And being let go, they went to their own company, and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said unto them. And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is: Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.” (Acts 4:23-28)

While citing Psalm 2:1-2 (Acts 4:25-26), those praying to God with one accord properly identified “the LORD” (Psa. 2:2, Acts 4:26) as being God the Father (Acts 4:24, 27), and “his anointed” (Psa. 2:2) or “his Christ” (Acts 4:26) as being “thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed” (Acts 4:27). They also properly identified “the heathen” (Psa. 2:1, Acts 4:25) as being “the Gentiles” (Acts 4:27), “the people” (Psa. 2:1, Acts 4:25) as being “the people of Israel” (Acts 4:27), “the kings of the earth” (Psa. 2:2, Acts 4:26) as being “Herod” (Acts 4:27), and “the rulers” (Psa. 2:2, Acts 4:26) as being “Pontius Pilate” (Acts 4:27).

Although we were not told here exactly who “the Gentiles” were, Jesus properly identified them elsewhere when he said:

“And Jesus going up to Jerusalem took the twelve disciples apart in the way, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death, And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again.” (Mat. 20:17-19)

The Gentile who scourged Jesus was Pontius Pilate (Mat. 27:26, Mark 15:15, Luke 23:16, John 19:1), and the Gentiles who mocked and crucified him were the Roman soldiers (Mat. 27:27-31, Mark 15:16-20, Luke 23:11-12, John 19:2-3). With these truths before us, here is Psalm 2:1-3 again, but with parenthetical clarifications added this time:

“Why do the heathen (the Roman soldiers) rage, and the people (the people of Israel) imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth (Herod) set themselves, and the rulers (Pontius Pilate) take counsel together, against the LORD (God the Father), and against his anointed (Jesus Christ), saying, Let us (the Roman soldiers, the people of Israel, Herod, and Pontius Pilate) break their (God the Father’s and Jesus Christ’s) bands asunder, and cast away their (God the Father’s and Jesus Christ’s) cords from us (the Roman soldiers, the people of Israel, Herod, and Pontius Pilate).” (Psa. 2:1-3)

What was God the Father’s response to this four-party anti-Christian conspiracy that resulted in Jesus Christ’s crucifixion?

“He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.” (Psa. 2:4-5)

First, God laughed at them derisively or with derision, ridicule, or mockery.

Second, God spoke unto them in his wrath or extreme anger, and he vexed them in his sore displeasure.

What exactly did he speak unto them?

He said, “Yet, have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion” (Psa. 2:6).

God informed these anti-Christian co-conspirators that, although they had taken counsel together to crucify Jesus Christ while rejecting him as their king, their plot was all in vain (Psa. 2:1) because Jesus will yet be his appointed king upon his holy hill of Mount Zion in Jerusalem.

How can somebody who has been crucified unto death yet be God’s appointed king upon his holy hill of Mount Zion?

We find the correct answer to this question in the very next verse where we read:

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

David was a prophet (Acts 2:30) who had the Spirit of Christ in him (1 Pet. 1:11), and he penned the second psalm (Acts 4:25) while under Divine inspiration (2 Sam. 23:1-2). In Psalm 2:7, he prophetically recorded the first part of a decree that was given by “the LORD,” who we previously determined to be God the Father (Psa. 2:2, Acts 4:24, 26-27), and that was declared by his “Son” or “holy child” (Acts 4:27, 30), Jesus Christ. While preaching at Antioch (Acts 13:14), the Apostle Paul gave us the proper interpretation of this declared decree when he said:

“Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent. For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him. And though they found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain. And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre. But God raised him from the dead: And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people. And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers, 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.” (Acts 13:26-33)

According to the Apostle Paul, they that dwelt at Jerusalem, and their rulers, fulfilled what had been prophesied in the Old Testament scriptures by delivering Jesus Christ to Pontius Pilate to be slain (Acts 13:27-29). As we have already seen, that fulfillment came when the Roman soldiers, the people of Israel, King Herod, and Pontius Pilate conspired together to crucify Jesus Christ, even as the prophet David had foretold that they would in Psalm 2:1-3 (Acts 4:24-28). However, neither the second psalm nor its prophecies ended there.

In Psalm 2:7, David prophetically recorded the first part of a decree that God the Father made concerning his Son, Jesus Christ, and that Jesus declared. In that decree, God told Jesus that he would be begotten on a specific day, and that was the day in which “God raised him from the dead” (Acts 13:30) or the day in which God “raised up Jesus again” (Acts 13:32-33). The Apostle Paul said that this part of the decree was a promise that God had made to the Jewish fathers or forefathers, and he preached it as glad tidings or good news to their children in Antioch that day (Acts 13:32-33).

In its original context in the prophetic, messianic second psalm, and when it is properly interpreted for us in the New Testament (Acts 13:32-33), Psalm 2:7 speaks of the specific day that Jesus Christ was begotten, and it was the day in which God the Father raised him from the dead.

(Continued in my next post)

 

[Nameaboveallnames]

(Continued from my previous post)

Psalm 2:7 is properly interpreted for us again in the epistle to the Hebrews where we read:

“For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins: Who can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way; for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity. And by reason hereof he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins. And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron. 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.” (Heb. 5:1-5)

This epistle was written to Hebrew believers who had previously been under the law, and they were very familiar with the Old Covenant or Old Testament. In this epistle, the author regularly made contrasts between someone or something under the “first covenant” (Heb. 8:7, 9:1), or “old” covenant (Heb. 8:13), or “first testament” (Heb. 9:15, 18), and Jesus Christ or something under the “new covenant” (Heb. 8:8, 13, 12:24), or “new testament (Heb. 9:15). The author’s intent was to prove to his Hebrew audience that the New Covenant is “a better covenant, which was established upon better promises” (Heb. 8:6), or that the New Testament is “a better testament” (Heb. 7:22).

To make his case, the author regularly cited two or three Old Testament proof texts or witnesses to his Hebrew audience that foretold of this new and better covenant. He did so because two or three witnesses are required to establish a truth under Jewish law (Deut. 17:6, 19:15, John 8:17), and citations from the law, the prophets, the psalms, and all the Old Testament scriptures are reliable witnesses (Luke 24:25-27, 44-48, Rom. 3:21-22).

In Hebrews 5:1-5, the author contrasted Aaron’s high priesthood with Jesus’ high priesthood.

Under the Old Covenant or Old Testament, Aaron, who was a Levite (Exo. 4:14), or who was from the tribe of Levi (Num. 26:59), was called of God (Heb. 5:4) to be high priest (Exo. 28:1), and thus began the Levitical priesthood (Heb. 7:11). As high priest, or as God’s appointed mediator between himself and men, Aaron was required to make sin offerings for both himself and the people (Lev. 16:6, 11, 15, Heb. 5:1-3). However, under that covenant, the priesthood was continually changing due to death. When Aaron died, his son became high priest in his stead (Exo. 29:29-30, Num. 20:28, Deut. 10:6) until he died. Upon his death, another descendant had to take his place as high priest, and so on, and so on.

Under the New Covenant or New Testament, Jesus has been fulfilling God’s call to be high priest since being raised from the dead. For this reason, the author of this epistle cited Psalm 2:7 as a proof text regarding Jesus’ priesthood (Heb. 5:5). It was only after Jesus had been begotten or raised from the dead (Acts 13:32-33) that God the Father glorified him as being high priest (Heb. 5:5).

The author of the epistle to the Hebrews contrasted the Levitical priesthood and Jesus’ priesthood in the following manner:

“By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death: But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.” (Heb. 7:22-25)

Unlike the Levitical priesthood that was continually changing due to the deaths of the high priests, Jesus’ priesthood is an unchangeable priesthood because “he continueth ever” (Heb. 7:24), or because “he ever liveth” (Heb. 7:25), or because he was begotten unto eternal life on the day in which God the Father raised him from the dead (Psa. 2:7, Acts 13:32-33, Heb. 5:5).

Every high priest is required to make sacrifices for sin (Heb. 5:1), and Jesus offered himself as a sacrifice (John 10:17-18) when he became “the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). When Jesus cried, “It is finished” (John 19:30), while hanging on the cross, he signified that the final sacrifice, which all the Old Testament sacrifices foreshadowed or pointed to, was being made. He also signified that a change was about to be made to the priesthood, and that change took place after Jesus was begotten or raised from the dead (Acts 13:32-33) because that is when God the Father glorified him as being high priest (Psa. 2:7, Heb. 5:5).

Thus far, we have examined Psalm 2:7 in its original context and in two of the three places it is quoted and properly interpreted for us in the New Testament. In all three instances, Jesus was begotten on a specific day, and that day was the day in which God the Father raised him from the dead (Acts 13:32-33). I will happily cover the other eight places in the Bible where the terms “begotten,” “only begotten,” and “first-begotten” are used in relation to Jesus Christ, including your two citations from the gospel of John, to show that they all similarly pertain to the specific day in which he was raised from the dead. Before I consider undertaking that task, I want to see how you respond to what I have shared here already.

Do you agree that the term “begotten” in Psalm 2:7, Acts 13:32-33, and Hebrews 5:5 pertains to the specific day in which Jesus was raised from the dead? I hope that you do because that is exactly how the term is used in those portions of scripture in relation to Jesus Christ.

 

[Scott Downey]

(Continued from my previous post)

Psalm 2:7 is properly interpreted for us again in the epistle to the Hebrews where we read:

“For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins: Who can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way; for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity. And by reason hereof he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins. And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron. 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.” (Heb. 5:1-5)

This epistle was written to Hebrew believers who had previously been under the law, and they were very familiar with the Old Covenant or Old Testament. In this epistle, the author regularly made contrasts between someone or something under the “first covenant” (Heb. 8:7, 9:1), or “old” covenant (Heb. 8:13), or “first testament” (Heb. 9:15, 18), and Jesus Christ or something under the “new covenant” (Heb. 8:8, 13, 12:24), or “new testament (Heb. 9:15). The author’s intent was to prove to his Hebrew audience that the New Covenant is “a better covenant, which was established upon better promises” (Heb. 8:6), or that the New Testament is “a better testament” (Heb. 7:22).

To make his case, the author regularly cited two or three Old Testament proof texts or witnesses to his Hebrew audience that foretold of this new and better covenant. He did so because two or three witnesses are required to establish a truth under Jewish law (Deut. 17:6, 19:15, John 8:17), and citations from the law, the prophets, the psalms, and all the Old Testament scriptures are reliable witnesses (Luke 24:25-27, 44-48, Rom. 3:21-22).

In Hebrews 5:1-5, the author contrasted Aaron’s high priesthood with Jesus’ high priesthood.

Under the Old Covenant or Old Testament, Aaron, who was a Levite (Exo. 4:14), or who was from the tribe of Levi (Num. 26:59), was called of God (Heb. 5:4) to be high priest (Exo. 28:1), and thus began the Levitical priesthood (Heb. 7:11). As high priest, or as God’s appointed mediator between himself and men, Aaron was required to make sin offerings for both himself and the people (Lev. 16:6, 11, 15, Heb. 5:1-3). However, under that covenant, the priesthood was continually changing due to death. When Aaron died, his son became high priest in his stead (Exo. 29:29-30, Num. 20:28, Deut. 10:6) until he died. Upon his death, another descendant had to take his place as high priest, and so on, and so on.

Under the New Covenant or New Testament, Jesus has been fulfilling God’s call to be high priest since being raised from the dead. For this reason, the author of this epistle cited Psalm 2:7 as a proof text regarding Jesus’ priesthood (Heb. 5:5). It was only after Jesus had been begotten or raised from the dead (Acts 13:32-33) that God the Father glorified him as being high priest (Heb. 5:5).

The author of the epistle to the Hebrews contrasted the Levitical priesthood and Jesus’ priesthood in the following manner:

“By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death: But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.” (Heb. 7:22-25)

Unlike the Levitical priesthood that was continually changing due to the deaths of the high priests, Jesus’ priesthood is an unchangeable priesthood because “he continueth ever” (Heb. 7:24), or because “he ever liveth” (Heb. 7:25), or because he was begotten unto eternal life on the day in which God the Father raised him from the dead (Psa. 2:7, Acts 13:32-33, Heb. 5:5).

Every high priest is required to make sacrifices for sin (Heb. 5:1), and Jesus offered himself as a sacrifice (John 10:17-18) when he became “the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). When Jesus cried, “It is finished” (John 19:30), while hanging on the cross, he signified that the final sacrifice, which all the Old Testament sacrifices foreshadowed or pointed to, was being made. He also signified that a change was about to be made to the priesthood, and that change took place after Jesus was begotten or raised from the dead (Acts 13:32-33) because that is when God the Father glorified him as being high priest (Psa. 2:7, Heb. 5:5).

Thus far, we have examined Psalm 2:7 in its original context and in two of the three places it is quoted and properly interpreted for us in the New Testament. In all three instances, Jesus was begotten on a specific day, and that day was the day in which God the Father raised him from the dead (Acts 13:32-33). I will happily cover the other eight places in the Bible where the terms “begotten,” “only begotten,” and “first-begotten” are used in relation to Jesus Christ, including your two citations from the gospel of John, to show that they all similarly pertain to the specific day in which he was raised from the dead. Before I consider undertaking that task, I want to see how you respond to what I have shared here already.

Do you agree that the term “begotten” in Psalm 2:7, Acts 13:32-33, and Hebrews 5:5 pertains to the specific day in which Jesus was raised from the dead? I hope that you do because that is exactly how the term is used in those portions of scripture in relation to Jesus Christ.

The Son was co-eternal having the power of an endless life with the Father from before the world was.
What you are exposing is the Father gave the Son a kingdom and all authority in heaven and earth after God raised Him from the dead.
That everyone should Honor the Son just as they honor the Father who sent the Son into the world.

John 17
Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You, 2 as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He [a]should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him. 3 And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. 4 I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. 5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together [b]with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

Then this too about the Son. The Son created all things for Himself, which means the Son is the creator.

Hebrews 1
God, who [a]at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the [b]worlds; 3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had [c]by Himself [d]purged [e]our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

The Son Exalted Above Angels​

5 For to which of the angels did He ever say:

“You are My Son,
Today I have begotten You”?
And again:

“I will be to Him a Father,
And He shall be to Me a Son”?
6 But when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says:

“Let all the angels of God worship Him.”
7 And of the angels He says:

“Who makes His angels spirits
And His ministers a flame of fire.”

8 But to the Son He says:

“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A [f]scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”
10 And:

“You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
11 They will perish, but You remain;
And they will all grow old like a garment;
12 Like a cloak You will fold them up,
And they will be changed.
But You are the same,
And Your years will not fail.”
13 But to which of the angels has He ever said:

“Sit at My right hand,
Till I make Your enemies Your footstool”?
14 Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Son glorifies the Father, and the Father glorifies the Son

 

[Scott Downey]

If anyone reads here, they will see some things maybe they had missed about the Son.
All things were created by and through the Son and for the Son.
For it pleased the Father that in Him (the Son) all the fullness (of God) should dwell,

If it pleased God, then we should also be pleased.
The lines of distinction blur between the Father and the Son, the more you read about Him.

Colossians 1
9 For this reason we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray for you, and to ask that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding; 10 that you may walk worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing Him, being fruitful in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God; 11 strengthened with all might, according to His glorious power, for all patience and longsuffering with joy; 12 giving thanks to the Father who has qualified us to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in the light. 13 He has delivered us from the power of darkness and [c]conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, 14 in whom we have redemption [d]through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or [e]principalities or [f]powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. 18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.

Reconciled in Christ​

19 For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, 20 and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.

21 And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled 22 in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight— 23 if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

 

[Scott Downey]

What is written in John 1, fully agrees with what Paul wrote about the Son, that He was in the beginning with God.
So before the creation of anything there was the Father and there was the Son together.
I mean, yeah, for us we like beginnings and endings, we have a harder time understanding what is before anything was, but our failure does not make it less real.

No one can know these things, what was before anything was made except themselves. Maybe someday we might know more about these things.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not [a]comprehend it.

 

[Scott Downey]

Jesus said before His resurrection this, which reveals their prior relationship of them knowing each other fully as Father and Son, as well as the truth that all things the Father has delivered to the Son, including the coming judgment.


John 5
21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will. 22 For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, 23 that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.

Luke 10
21 In that hour Jesus rejoiced in the Spirit and said, “I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and revealed them to babes. Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in Your sight. 22 All[g] things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, and who the Father is except the Son, and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.”

23 Then He turned to His disciples and said privately, “Blessed are the eyes which see the things you see; 24 for I tell you that many prophets and kings have desired to see what you see, and have not seen it, and to hear what you hear, and have not heard it.”

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

May I ask what you mean when you say that you believe Jesus is the Trinity?

He's saying he does not believe in the Father and he does not believe in the Holy Spirit.

Then, he'll come along and contradict himself claiming he does believe in the father and the Holy Spirit.

So he's like all confused due to not accepting what God says in His Word:

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.

And when he objects to 1 John 5:7 just ask him this:

Ever see all the scriptures about the Father?
Ever see all the scriptures about Jesus?
Ever see all the scriptures about the Holy Spirit?

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

I believe that he became the Son of God at the time of his incarnation

Nope. Jesus Christ is the Word incarnate in the flesh

John 1:1-4
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God.
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

Jesus Who is The Christ as been with God all along an d came out from God.

 

[Nameaboveallnames]

The Son was co-eternal having the power of an endless life with the Father from before the world was.

The one we now know as "Jesus" (he wasn't given that name until the time of his incarnation) was co-eternal with the one we now call God the Father, but this does not necessitate that they had a Father and Son relationship from eternity past. While speaking of Jesus, God said that he would be a Father to him, and that he would be his Son (2 Sam. 7:14, 1 Chron. 17:13, Heb. 1:5). He did not say that they always had that relationship. God's Son was made of a woman, and made under the law (Gal. 4:4), and that transpired at the time of his incarnation, and not from eternity past.

What you are exposing is the Father gave the Son a kingdom and all authority in heaven and earth after God raised Him from the dead.

Instead, what I have only begun to expose is that EVERY TIME the terms "begotten," "only begotten," and "first-begotten" are used in scripture in relation to Jesus Christ, they ALWAYS pertain to the specific day in which he was raised from the dead, and they NEVER pertain to the nonsensical and self-contradictory time when he was allegedly "eternally begotten." The Bible speaks of no such thing, but the Jehovah's Witnesses CULT does.

Then this too about the Son. The Son created all things for Himself, which means the Son is the creator.

Hebrews 1
God, who [a]at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the [b]worlds; 3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had [c]by Himself [d]purged [e]our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

At first glance, it does seem that the one we now know as "Jesus" created all things while he was God's Son, but at second glance, we can easily recognize that this is not so. For example, we read:

"And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ." (Eph. 3:9)

When "the Word" created all things (John 1:1-3), was he yet known by the name "Jesus?" No, he was not, Again, he was not given that name until the time of his incarnation (Mat. 1:21, Luke 1:31).

When "the Word" created all things (John 1:1-3), was he yet the Christ? No, he was not. He did not become the Christ until the time of his incarnation.

How then could Paul say that Jesus Christ created all things? He could do so simply because he was describing what the one we now know as "Jesus Christ" did before his incarnation. The same principle applies to Jesus' Sonship. He did not become God's Son until the time of his incarnation, but we now know him as God's Son, so we can say that God created all things through his Son.

To make this simpler, I could rightly say that my father was born and raised in Cleveland, Ohio. However, and this is a BIG HOWEVER, he was not yet my father at that time. Later on, after he met my mother and the two of them married and had children, he became my father. It is the same exact principle here.

 

[Scott Downey]

The one we now know as "Jesus" (he wasn't given that name until the time of his incarnation) was co-eternal with the one we now call God the Father, but this does not necessitate that they had a Father and Son relationship from eternity past. While speaking of Jesus, God said that he would be a Father to him, and that he would be his Son (2 Sam. 7:14, 1 Chron. 17:13, Heb. 1:5). He did not say that they always had that relationship. God's Son was made of a woman, and made under the law (Gal. 4:4), and that transpired at the time of his incarnation, and not from eternity past.

Instead, what I have only begun to expose is that EVERY TIME the terms "begotten," "only begotten," and "first-begotten" are used in scripture in relation to Jesus Christ, they ALWAYS pertain to the specific day in which he was raised from the dead, and they NEVER pertain to the nonsensical and self-contradictory time when he was allegedly "eternally begotten." The Bible speaks of no such thing, but the Jehovah's Witnesses CULT does.

At first glance, it does seem that the one we now know as "Jesus" created all things while he was God's Son, but at second glance, we can easily recognize that this is not so. For example, we read:

"And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ." (Eph. 3:9)

When "the Word" created all things (John 1:1-3), was he yet known by the name "Jesus?" No, he was not, Again, he was not given that name until the time of his incarnation (Mat. 1:21, Luke 1:31).

When "the Word" created all things (John 1:1-3), was he yet the Christ? No, he was not. He did not become the Christ until the time of his incarnation.

How then could Paul say that Jesus Christ created all things? He could do so simply because he was describing what the one we now know as "Jesus Christ" did before his incarnation. The same principle applies to Jesus' Sonship. He did not become God's Son until the time of his incarnation, but we now know him as God's Son, so we can say that God created all things through his Son.

To make this simpler, I could rightly say that my father was born and raised in Cleveland, Ohio. However, and this is a BIG HOWEVER, he was not yet my father at that time. Later on, after he met my mother and the two of them married and had children, he became my father. It is the same exact principle here.

Scripture actually directly proves the Son as the Christ before the incarnation in v4.

1 Cor 10
Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, 2 all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3 all ate the same spiritual food, 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ. 5 But with most of them God was not well pleased, for their bodies were scattered in the wilderness.

If you read this, will you repent? (as in change your mind)

What is right is God gave the Son a human body, that is what incarnation means. And we know Him then as Jesus,

 

[Nameaboveallnames]

Scripture actually directly proves the Son as the Christ before the incarnation in v4.

1 Cor 10
Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, 2 all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3 all ate the same spiritual food, 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ. 5 But with most of them God was not well pleased, for their bodies were scattered in the wilderness.

If you read this, will you repent? (as in change your mind)

What is right is God gave the Son a human body, that is what incarnation means. And we know Him then as Jesus,

Why would I repent when you are the one who is in grievous error?

If you honestly believe that Jesus was the Christ before his incarnation, then you obviously do not know what the word or title "Christ" means. Simply put, it means "anointed." Do you honestly believe that the one we now know as "Jesus" needed to be anointed prior to his incarnation? If you do, then you are the one who desperately needs to repent of that nonsense.

"How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil: for God was with him." (Acts 10:38)

Again, Jesus was not given that name until the time of his incarnation (Mat. 1:21. Luke 1:31). This is biblical truth, whether or not you ever accept it as such.

Furthermore, Jesus was not from Nazareth until the time of his incarnation (Mat. 2:23), so when God anointed (which is what "Christ" means) Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power, he did so during the time of his incarnation.

What you addressed here is the same exact scenario that I previously described. Now that we know "the Word" as "Jesus," the "Christ," and God's "Son," Paul oftentimes mentioned things about the pre-incarnate Word while using such terminology. If not, then why would "the Word" who "was God" (John 1:1) need to be anointed pre-incarnation? You are only digging yourself a giant theological hole that you will never be able to get out of apart from forsaking that absolute nonsense.

 

[Scott Downey]

Why would I repent when you are the one who is in grievous error?

If you honestly believe that Jesus was the Christ before his incarnation, then you obviously do not know what the word or title "Christ" means. Simply put, it means "anointed." Do you honestly believe that the one we now know as "Jesus" needed to be anointed prior to his incarnation? If you do, then you are the one who desperately needs to repent of that nonsense.

"How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil: for God was with him." (Acts 10:38)

Again, Jesus was not given that name until the time of his incarnation (Mat. 1:21. Luke 1:31). This is biblical truth, whether or not you ever accept it as such.

Furthermore, Jesus was not from Nazareth until the time of his incarnation (Mat. 2:23), so when God anointed (which is what "Christ" means) Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power, he did so during the time of his incarnation.

What you addressed here is the same exact scenario that I previously described. Now that we know "the Word" as "Jesus," the "Christ," and God's "Son," Paul oftentimes mentioned things about the pre-incarnate Word while using such terminology. If not, then why would "the Word" who "was God" (John 1:1) need to be anointed pre-incarnation? You are only digging yourself a giant theological hole that you will never be able to get out of apart from forsaking that absolute nonsense.

1 Cor 10
Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, 2 all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3 all ate the same spiritual food, 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ. 5 But with most of them God was not well pleased, for their bodies were scattered in the wilderness.

See that word, and that was during the OT times before Christ was born as a babe

Your doctrine stand has blinded you, it is right there in v4

 

[Nameaboveallnames]

1 Cor 10
Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, 2 all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3 all ate the same spiritual food, 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ. 5 But with most of them God was not well pleased, for their bodies were scattered in the wilderness.

See that word, and that was during the OT times before Christ was born as a babe

Your doctrine stand has blinded you, it is right there in v4

You're the blind one. In order for your position to be correct, Jesus was anointed with the Holy Ghost by God as the Christ prior to his incarnation or while he was fully divine. That is ludicrous. As has already been pointed out to you, God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost IN HIS HUMANITY, and that is when he became the Christ or the anointed one.

 

[Scott Downey]

You're the blind one. In order for your position to be correct, Jesus was anointed with the Holy Ghost by God as the Christ prior to his incarnation or while he was fully divine. That is ludicrous. As has already been pointed out to you, God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost IN HIS HUMANITY, and that is when he became the Christ or the anointed one.

You are the one denying the preexistent Christ. The apostle Paul, you must think then, is a false teacher.

Because you prefer your own understanding and do not agree with scripture. You just agree with the scripture that agrees with your system of theology. That is not how it works with God. We do not take away from the scripture.

Quick search here found this

Topical Bible: Jesus, the Christ: Preexistence of

 

[Scott Downey]

Who is Jesus Christ? | GotQuestions.org

Who is Jesus Christ? Is Jesus Christ the Savior and Messiah? Is Jesus God in the flesh?

www.gotquestions.org

 

[Nameaboveallnames]

You are the one denying the preexistent Christ.

This will be the last time that I bother to acknowledge you unless you recognize and admit your own error.

Mat 1:16
And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. G5547

Jesus is called "Christ" because the word Christ, "christos" in the underlying Greek text, means "anointed."

G5547 - christos - Strong's Greek Lexicon (kjv)

G5547 - Χριστός Christós, khris-tos'; from ; anointed, i.e. the Messiah, an epithet of Jesus:—Christ.

www.blueletterbible.org

Anybody in their right mind understands that the one we now know as "Jesus" was not anointed until the time of his incarnation. Prior to his incarnation, he was fully divine in nature, and no part human in nature, and, therefore, there was no need whatsoever for him to be anointed with the Holy Ghost because he "was God" (John 1:1). In reality, which is something that you seem to have no interest in, Jesus needed to be anointed with the Holy Ghost IN HIS HUMANITY, and that occurred at the time of his incarnation.

Act 10:38
How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

^^^THIS^^^ is when God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power, and it occurred during the time of his incarnation.

The apostle Paul, you must think then, is a false teacher.

Nope. You are the false teacher, and not Paul. I love the Apostle Paul. Unlike you, I understand his writings.

Because you prefer your own understanding and do not agree with scripture. You just agree with the scripture that agrees with your system of theology. That is not how it works with God. We do not take away from the scripture.

Yeah, right. What you are teaching is heresy. According to you, when the one we now know as "Jesus" was only fully divine prior to his incarnation, he needed to be anointed with the Holy Ghost. You need to repent of this heresy, or you can just answer to Jesus for it on the day of judgment. It's your call. If you stubbornly choose to remain a heretic, then I will simply place you on ignore.

 

[Scott Downey]

This will be the last time that I bother to acknowledge you unless you recognize and admit your own error.

Mat 1:16
And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. G5547

Jesus is called "Christ" because the word Christ, "christos" in the underlying Greek text, means "anointed."

G5547 - christos - Strong's Greek Lexicon (kjv)

G5547 - Χριστός Christós, khris-tos'; from ; anointed, i.e. the Messiah, an epithet of Jesus:—Christ.

www.blueletterbible.org

Anybody in their right mind understands that the one we now know as "Jesus" was not anointed until the time of his incarnation. Prior to his incarnation, he was fully divine in nature, and no part human in nature, and, therefore, there was no need whatsoever for him to be anointed with the Holy Ghost because he "was God" (John 1:1). In reality, which is something that you seem to have no interest in, Jesus needed to be anointed with the Holy Ghost IN HIS HUMANITY, and that occurred at the time of his incarnation.

Act 10:38
How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

^^^THIS^^^ is when God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power, and it occurred during the time of his incarnation.


Nope. You are the false teacher, and not Paul. I love the Apostle Paul. Unlike you, I understand his writings.


Yeah, right. What you are teaching is heresy. According to you, when the one we now know as "Jesus" was only fully divine prior to his incarnation, he needed to be anointed with the Holy Ghost. You need to repent of this heresy, or you can just answer to Jesus for it on the day of judgment. It's your call. If you stubbornly choose to remain a heretic, then I will simply place you on ignore.

You cannot justify your view on this, so you resort to ignorance and the ignore button. Just proves your really stuck in this religious ideology you have. So typical too.

Your claim to loving Paul is false, you do not agree with Paul calling the Son the Christ before His incarnation. Maybe you will calm down later and think about that.