Dano stated:
The apostles were already apostles before Jesus sent them out just as Jesus was already God's Son even before He was sent into the world.
The issue at hand is not the deity of Jesus in his humanity but his sonship in eternity.
Jerryin
@ Dano, Doesn't the Scriptures say that "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God?" Jn. 1:1
I don't see anything here that tells of a "Sonship" in these verses...
Sing F Lau
Brother Dano, what a confused comparison!
They were men first before they were made apostles by Jesus. And they were made apostles first before they were sent out! First they were men... and they remain men until they were made apostles. And AFTER they were made apostles, they were still men, and as apostles they they were sent out.
The Word is eternal, but the eternal Word was not Son. The Word was made flesh in time, and the Son of God was begotten in time. After the Son of God was begotten, He was sent for His work at the proper time. And He was officially, and publicly sent for His work at His water baptism, where it was public declared, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased."
There are the men... they were made apostles... so they are apostolic men... and as apostolic men they were sent out.
There is the eternal Word... He was made flesh... so He is Jesus Christ the God-man, the only begotten Son of God... and as God-man He was send out.
Put away eternal sonship in the safe for a while. It clouds your thinking.
Dano
---------------------
The Word was made flesh and THE SON OF GOD WAS BEGOTTEN.
---------------------
If you recall I brought up the issue of the right translation of "monogenes" on PB group because this may determine the foundation of the sonship of Christ: whether eternal or incarnational.
The statement quoted, to me, is brought about by what I believe a mistranslation.
Bible students must not build around the meaning of "begotten" but the original text, MONOGENES, which should not be rendered 'begotten' but "only kind".
After we have translated the original text properly, only then can we start laboring for the right meaning of "begotten".
Sing F Lau
So, tell us who is the 'only kind' - Jesus Christ that is BEGOTTEN and BORN, or the eternal UN-BEGOTTEN Word, or something else?
Perhaps the idea of 'eternal sonship' is only feasible with the re-translation of the KJT!
Jerryin
@ Dano, The Apostles were sent out by Jesus and given that name by Him AT THAT TIME...The name, APOSTLE means, according to Strong's: "a delegate, messenger, one sent forth with orders
a) specifically applied to the twelve apostles of Christ...I don't see how they could be apostles before that time...
Sing F Lau
Brother Dano, however μονογενής is to be translated, it is certain that it is a compound word from μόνος (G3441) and γίνομαι (G1096).
μόνος (G3441) : alone, only,
γίνομαι (G1096): to become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be, receive being.
That's from Strong. Not that I trust him. Just that he is far superior in his Greek.
[It is commonly imagined that 'only begotten' is from μόνος (G3441) and γενής (genes).] That's a basic error.
Dano
As my knowledge of Greek is very limited, I shall appeal directly to the scriptures.
"For this purpose the Son of God was MANIFESTED, that he might destroy the works of the devil." - 1 John 3:8
... To manifest means to display or to bring to appearance.
Could we at least take the verse at face value. It says the Son of God was manifest.
Language could not be any plainer.
Sing F Lau
Isn't language more than plainer that the Son must be begotten first before the Son can be manifested?
And may I inquired, just when was the Son of God manifested?
Was it when the Word was made flesh, or was it when the Son of God officially entered His public ministry?
Mt 3:
13 ¶ Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.
14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
Please don't equate the begetting of God's Son as the manifesting of God's Son.
John 1
29 ¶ The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
30 This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.
31 And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.
32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.
33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.
You read those words in verse 31? Here they are again "And I knew him not: but that he should be made MANIFEST to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water."
Jesus Christ, the Son of God was made manifest to Israel when He officially entered into His public ministry! let the Scriptures speak for itself... don't read ideas into it.
Your fixation on 'eternal sonship' has confused your mind on these basic things.
