GG,
It's really very simple. At the end of each sentence are bible verses that clear it all up! You obviously ignored all of those. It's not the best idea to half read posts and then attack people. At least know why you are attacking.
It seemed like you were posting conflicting verses.
I don't half read posts....
I thought you were saying that you're a JW.
I don't read each and every post on a thread so I don't really know what you believe..
I only know what you write to ME.
I thought you had something new since you said it was our language that was the problem. Nothing there is new.
I understand -- monogenés better than you do.
This makes me happy.
No problem for me.
its a Greek adjective consisting of two parts, μονο (mono) and γενης (genes)
The first part of the word-- it's from the Greek word μονον (monon) an adverb meaning "only".
That's not the issue- It's the second part--
The traditional view is that γενης (genes) is to be derived from the Greek verb γενναω (‘to beget’), so that μονογενης (monogenes) means only begotten. BUT---
A more recent view is that γενης is derived from γενος, meaning ‘class’, ‘sort’, ‘kind’, so that μονογενης must mean "one of a kind" or "unique"’.
Right.
And it meant unique even back at the beginning.
None of the ECFs believed Jesus was created....
In support of this later view, some say that γενος has only a single ν (the Greek letter pronounced- nu), so does μονογενης, while γενναω has two ν's.
So which is right? Makes no real difference. It will always mean what it means no matter what.
Right.
Even though I don't know Greek (Koine or otherwise).
You are using only MONO. That's half of the word. That actually hurts your position and I can explain that to you at some point if you want.
No. I don't only know MONO. You're assuming this.
If you accept what the whole word really does mean it is far better than saying it only means unique. It actually supports the trinity IF you understand a few passages in John the way I do-- I only know several people who do.
Perhaps you'd care to share your knowledge?
Most people just skip over those! It actually makes it airtight IMO. BUT I still have a problem with the phrase "eternally begotten".
I DID say that I also have a problem with the phrase.
It is illogical and opposing. That is not to say I don't accept the trinity. Maybe I am not being clear enough for you. I wish there was a place on here to speak without interruptions from Uni's. I find that so annoying- we ought to have a place to go.
I'm sorry that I misunderstood and believed you to be a JW.
And, I can't find your post now..but you stated to me that I believe a person has to understand what begotten means to be a Christian.
No. I've NEVER stated this.
In fact, discussion about this word is totally a waste of time.
What I state is this:
A person is free to believe whatever he wishes to believe...
but to have the word CHRISTIAN under his name,,,he must adhere to Christian beliefs.
I feel strongly about this and repeat it many times on all forums.
This is not saying that non-christians cannot be saved...
but only that definite beliefs allow one to be defined as Christian.
If those beliefs are not present...then how could one possibly define themselves as Christian???