THE Trinity can Now be discussed.

[Scott Downey]

No. That is not a Biblical teaching

So, what's the difference between "Son" and "begotten Son?" Incarnation? Something else?

Well if you believe in the trinity they are all equal as God.

 

[Wrangler]

No doubt, but the question stands. What "glory" did the Son enjoy with the Father before the world existed (John 17:5)?

Oh, I thought my answer made that clear; God’s plan to give him all authority on Earth and heaven. BTW, I consider chapter 17 to be the REAL, heart felt Lord’s Prayer, rather than the cerebral one we are taught. The angst Jesus has for his fate and the fate of his friends is palpable here. Did you catch this glory is passed on to his Apostles in verse 22?

This is very telling of the nature of this glory; it is transferable. Do you recall in other verses, Scripture explains Jesus emptied himself, appearing on Earth in the form of a servant?

Jesus talks about his Second Coming in his full glory. This implies a time dependent function of changing glory from a nadir to this zenith. A flip side of your question is what was Jesus’ lowest point, furthest away from glory? I believe it was at the time of John 15, parallel of Matthew 26:39.

 

[RedFan]

Well if you believe in the trinity they are all equal as God.

I do believe that. But the question is, what does it mean for the Son to be "begotten" by (or of) God.

 

[RedFan]

Oh, I thought my answer made that clear; God’s plan to give him all authority on Earth and heaven.

I don't see how the Son's "glory" with the Father before the world existed can consist of a FUTURE plan to give Him authority. He had "glory" before the world began. What did it consist of?

 

[MonoBiblical]

Fragment 4: Annihilation of the Realm of Death​

From the beginning you are immortal and children of eternal life. You wished to distribute death amongst yourselves so as to consume it and annihilate it, and so that death might die in and through you. For when you dissolve the world and are not yourselves dissolved, you rule over creation and over the whole of corruption.

I find it interesting how Valentinus is pre-Origen and pre-Orthodox with this statement. The belief that you are save while not in the afterlife is utterly gnostic in origin. Valentinus believed Mankind had immortal godlike sparks in him, but this is a far cry from the fact that everything dies.

Also, the word salvation is abused to mean someone can saved by word or LOGOI. Suffering is thought to mean one is saved and divine like in modern Orthodox Christianity. Thus, instead of avoiding death; Someone is supposed to embrace death and be saved.

TRULY NONE ARE SAFE, till God wakes them in the afterlife.

 

[Wrangler]

I don't see how the Son's "glory" with the Father before the world existed can consist of a FUTURE plan to give Him authority. He had "glory" before the world began. What did it consist of?

I already answered this question twice. Can’t answer my questions?

 

[RLT63]

No one. Words are WHAT’s not WHO’s.

John couldn't be clearer

 

[RLT63]

Not one verse says Jesus is God. Not one verse says Jesus is the word! And I see you are still dodging the question of the importance of believing your doctrine from the POV of Scripture verses?

You don't know what my doctrine is

 

[RLT63]

Oh, I thought my answer made that clear; God’s plan to give him all authority on Earth and heaven. BTW, I consider chapter 17 to be the REAL, heart felt Lord’s Prayer, rather than the cerebral one we are taught. The angst Jesus has for his fate and the fate of his friends is palpable here. Did you catch this glory is passed on to his Apostles in verse 22?

This is very telling of the nature of this glory; it is transferable. Do you recall in other verses, Scripture explains Jesus emptied himself, appearing on Earth in the form of a servant?

Jesus talks about his Second Coming in his full glory. This implies a time dependent function of changing glory from a nadir to this zenith. A flip side of your question is what was Jesus’ lowest point, furthest away from glory? I believe it was at the time of John 15, parallel of Matthew 26:39.

What would he have to empty himself of if he had not pre-existed?

 

[JLB]

The Tetragrammaton WHWH appeared in reference to Yahweh

For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day. Hebrews 4:8 NKJV


For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. Hebrews 4:8 KJV


YEHOWSHUWA

 

[Wrangler]

@Wrangler ..what did you say the word was again?

‘the word’ = words credited to God, either directly or through an agent, such as Angel, prophet or son.

The Greek word ‘logos’ expands beyond word to include logic, thought or plan, meaning it does not have to be spoken or written.

Does it mean that the word had already been spoken by God outside of time..then it came into being..in time?

No. Your question is beyond what is stated in Scripture. We don’t know if God’s first words were “Let there be light.”

Because Scripture is silent on the subject, we don’t know when heaven and heavenly beings were created. This invites speculation. Many believe heaven was created first.

I believe this. The serpent in the Garden, credited with being the fallen angel Lucifer, implies he fell before Adam and Eve were in the Garden.

 

[JLB]

Jesus, on the other hand is "son", not "father".

Yes Jesus s the Son -

But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”
And: “You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
Hebrews 1:8-10

 

[Wrangler]

What would he have to empty himself of if he had not pre-existed?

I already answered this twice.

 

[Wrangler]

John couldn't be clearer

Agreed. He could not be clearer in 20:31. It says NOTHING about the trinity.

 

[amigo de christo]

The Holy Spirit would never say such things nor lead you away from TRUTH

Someone named Rita has been persuaded by the error of the jehovah false witness religion.

marvel not , due to satans unity and his lets be one and not judge mindset
the denominations have merged so too they bring their false hoods .
IF ya think its bad now , PHASE TWO HAS BEGAN david . THEY GONNA NOW MERGE ALL THE Relgions .
satans diversity and inclusivity GROWS and it has come to lead all to perdtion
THEY GONNA MERGE david . they gonna think its folks like us who DO NOT KNOW GOD
and that they DO KNOW GOD and they will all heed the call
to rid the earth of all that did not conform . Think not can this happen , rather KNOW ITS HAPPENING
and WILL HAPPEN .
JESUS SHED HIS BLOOD
we had better be prepared to shed ours too , to remain faithful EVEN UNTO DEATH . cause TRIBULATION IS A COMING david .
ITS a coming against us .

 

[MonoBiblical]

"Proceeded Forth"

†ἐξέρχομαι exérchomai, ex-er'-khom-ahee; from G1537 and G2064; to issue (literally or figuratively):—come (forth, out), depart (out of), escape, get out, go (abroad, away, forth, out, thence), proceed (forth), spread abroad.

G1831 - exerchomai - Strong's Greek Lexicon (NKJV)

G1831 - ἐξέρχομαι exérchomai, ex-er'-khom-ahee; from and ; to issue (literally or figuratively):—come (forth, out), depart (out of), escape, get out, go (abroad, away, forth, out, thence), proceed (forth), spread abroad.

www.blueletterbible.org

ἐξέρχομαι​

Transliteration
exerchomai (Key)
Pronunciation
ex-er'-khom-ahee

Part of Speech
verb
Root Word (Etymology)
From ἐκ (G1537) and ἔρχομαι (G2064)

The KJV translates Strong's G1831 in the following manner: go out (60x), come (34x), depart (28x), go (25x), go forth (25x), come out (23x), come forth (9x),

This is too simplistic. You have avoided the Thayer's lexicon, and that the word is passive. It means to be sent; no number of KJV/Strong errors will change it. I say this only because I don't believe in deponent verbs, or Strong's "lexicon".

 

[RedFan]

I already answered this question twice. Can’t answer my questions?

Well, I just looked back at your posts and don't see any answer to what the pre-world glory of the Son was except a promise of future authority -- which, again, I don't think can be the glory referenced in John 17:5. So if that's the answer you are providing, I guess you did answer.

 

[Wrangler]

Well, I just looked back at your posts and don't see any answer to what the pre-world glory of the Son was except a promise of future authority -- which, again, I don't think can be the glory referenced in John 17:5. So if that's the answer you are providing, I guess you did answer.

You’d do well to answer questions put to you. A pre-requisite to understanding my answer is to understand that Jesus’ glory varies with time.

If one holds to him possessing invariable glory nothing about this makes sense. You cannot look at 17:5 as a stand alone verse but in the context of Jesus own words of returning in full glory on the clouds, etc.

 

[MonoBiblical]

 

[CadyandZoe]

So, what's the difference between "Son" and "begotten Son?" Incarnation? Something else?

The term "begotten" is used figuratively, talking about how Jesus is the son of God. The phrase comes from Psalm 2, which is a coronation Psalm, and on the day that the son of David becomes King, i.e. the son of God, is the day that God has "begotten" him. Psalm 2 is talking about a grown man, not a baby.