Really Lance,
You need to warn Jonathan about receiving teaching from ppl such as
this because it is not faith enhancing at all. This is is probably a
well-meaning fellow but his teaching is full of fear and has no new
argument. All of his scriptures are NT. Peter's proclamation,
John 3:16 etc. He uses lots of words and just goes round and round with
the same ol, same ol. He accuses those who deny the "eternal" part
of using carnal reasoning and then goes on to do the same himself along
with some new accusations ie: those who don't subscribe to his
doctrine are denying the Son and under God's wrath, and they are Socian
(which is someone who denies the trinity); this man is
another follower of Athanasius and the Nicene creed.
For the record God does not mind us questioning when we do not
understand; he told the prophet "Come let us reason together." And
second I do not deny the Sonship of Christ nor do I have a problem with
the Godhead. I believe according to the scriptures that the second
member of the eternal Godhead known as God The Word became Jesus the Son
when He was born to Mary which is/was prophesied in Psalm 2:7 "Thou art my
Son, this day have I begotten
Thee"
So Jesus the Christ had a beginning and the word begotten is the
operative one, in Strongs it is #3205 Yalad meaning "bearing young,
midwife" Hebrews 1:5 validates this understanding and so does Matt
8:29 - (even the demons knew about it and feared because noone had
challenged them under the Old Covenant). There are others who God
calls sons ie: the angels, Israel, and even Satan as a created being but
Jesus is the only one who was "begotten"
of God.
That's my foundation. Now if you can come up with something
better from the OT without all of this circular religious reasoning;
something clear from the mouths of two or more OT witnesses - I
am eager to hear it. Still waiting patiently .....
judyt