johnny guitar
Well-known member
He has spoken to us IN The Son BY whom he made the worlds.
While Jesus was incarnate...what was God the Father doing?
- Thread starter Yahchristian
- Start date
johnny guitar
Well-known member
NO Christ The MAN until the Word became flesh.
There WAS The Son of God from eternity.
It says in Hebrews 1:1 that in various ways God spoke in times past to the fathers, and then in verse 2 in the LAST DAYS by his Son. So those who claim a literal Son manifesting or speaking to anyone in the OT contradicts this verse.
I do see how someone could take verse 2 as being an eternal Son if they aren't committed to OT foundational truths about God, NT teachings about the Logos, and simple reality as to what a "Son" is. If we go the way of a literal eternal Son then we must dispatch with Luke 1:35 and sanity.
Hebrews 1:2 "but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world."
I believe the best explanation that harmonizes everything including verses like Luke 1:35 and Galatians 4:4 is that the one who became the Son created all things. We know from John 1 that through the Father's Logos, the worlds were created and then the Logos became flesh. It was this becoming flesh (a real Son) that is the reason he is called the Son, because that is what he actually was according to the angel and the reason why he is called the Son of God (Luke 1:35).
Historians could say that President Ronald Reagan was born in 1911. This is accurate and we understand the language to mean that the one who was born in 1911 was named Ronald Reagan and that later in his life he became President. We know the language doesn't mean he was President when he was born.
So too with the Son of God. The eternal Logos, who is God, became flesh and the one who is the Son is eternal, not as a literal Son, but as the eternal God Himself. We find confirmation of this in John 1 where it is only after verse 10 when the word is made flesh, that the term "Son" is used in this chapter. It doesn't say "In the beginning was the Son, and the Son was with God".
God is eternal and the Father's Logos was an ongoing manifestation of creation (Genesis 1) and ultimately culminating in the taking on of flesh (John 1:10). The Son is eternal in the sense that God becoming man was in God's plans as though it already was, but the literal Son in space and time is defined by Luke 1:35.
Some Trinitarians also get off track with the language of predestination as if God has done away with real free will and destined some to heaven and some to hell.
Last edited:
johnny guitar
Well-known member
Has spoken IN The Son BY whom He made the worlds.
Yes, The Son was involved in all creation.
Yes, The Son was involved in all creation.
I think you missed the point. "IN" doesn't change my point that the speaking wasn't in the OT but now in the last days. In other words, in the times of the Apostles and early church to now. God used ways, other than the Son, in speaking to those before. Trinitarians have the Son making appearances and speaking in the OT, and that concept contradicts Hebrews 1:1-2.
A literal eternal "Son" is not really a "Son" at all because "Son" by definition is a caused existence and contradicts scriptures like Luke 1:35. The One who became the Son is eternal, but the term "Son" relates to Jesus' humanity.
Photine
Well-known member
It says the Father created the universe by The Son.
The Son is the Holy Spirit in Luke 1:35.
The Father made the universe BY the Holy Spirit (Ps 33:6, Ps 104:30).
Thus, The Son IS the Holy Spirit.
What is your definition of "Son"?
Photine
Well-known member
What did Jesus say? He said He proceeded forth from within God.
Luke 1:35 explains when/how this began. What people that aren't Oneness often forget is the genuine humanity of Christ and that he perceived as the Son of God within the scope of that human experience. It is false mythology to have a coloring book concept of an eternal Son God person leaving the Father behind in heaven and then this 2nd person, who was already a Son, becoming a Son again in the sense of his real conception and birth as a human. A flag needs to be thrown down on this and people need to see the fallacy in this doubling up of his Sonship, especially in light of the logical fallacy of an "eternally begotten Son".
There are those on the far left who refuse to define a woman. Can you define "Son"?
Photine
Well-known member
Luke 1:35 is about the Eternal Son descending from Heaven, sent by the Father.
It wasn't the Father Himself who descended.
This is where oneness is wrong.
The Son said "I DID NOT SEND MYSELF".
Already did.
johnny guitar
Well-known member
The Son spoke to selected individuals in the OT; He now speaks to ALL men.
NO ONE became The Son of God. The Son of God became a MAN in Luke 1:35 and other Scriptures.
johnny guitar
Well-known member
The Son did NOT become a Son again; The Son of God DID become The Son of Mary.
According to Luke 1:35, the reason he is called THE SON OF GOD was due to the miraculous conception. This is not that hard. The one who became the Son is the eternal God. If you think along these lines, then you don't need to depart from sanity. What is the definition of a "Son", or a "Women"? It's time for you to leave the high sounding nonsense that Paul warned you about (Colossians 2:8)?
Photine
Well-known member
Oneness.. heresy.
You are confused again about the genuine humanity of the Son of God. It's all about His humanity and this is where you leave sanity and go off into lala land as Paul warned you in Colossians 2:8.
"One" is mentioned dozens of times in the OT and NT. The number Three is NEVER mentioned in regard to God. Not a single time. It is a mischaracterization of God using high sounding nonsense.
Your response is very much like the LGBTQ alphabet mob who can't define a woman. Evasive and empty rhetoric, but no answer. If you choose not to give a straight answer as to your definition of a "Son", then just know that God is not the author of confusion. God doesn't play games with words and truth doesn't need that kind of belligerent ignorance.
What's your definition of a "Son"?
johnny guitar
Well-known member
You must state whether you are referring to Jesus The Son of God or Jesus The Son of Mary.
The eternal God NEVER became The Son of God.
Jesus is not two persons or divided like that even for Trinitarians.