Christs Two natures are what?

Originally Posted by mfblume

Extrapolate a bit further back in your reasoning beyond SON. The SON is the person of Jesus manifested in flesh. Jesus is the eternal one. Not the Son. The Son had a beginning. In fact the only reason the bible gives for the title SON is an anthropomorphic reason. The Father impregnated Mary and she birthed a child, making the Son of this mother named Mary and the Father. How can the Son be eternal unless Mary is also eternal? You cannot have an eternal Son without both an eternal Father and Mother. And since this is not the case, the Son is not eternal.

Since the PERSON who is the Son is the same Person who is the Father, and the PERSON is eternal, we see the deity in the Son. The Son does not have to be eternal in order for the person who is the Son to be eternal.



Incorrect. If there is a SINGLE PERSON who is eternal, and manifested as Father, and then also as Son only through incarnation and onward, then the Son is not eternal, but His person is.

You're welcome!

Actually Praxeas has told me that all Oneness Pentecostals believe that the Son has existed eternally and so is an eternal Son. He has warned me that if I ever say that Oneness Pentecostals deny the fact that the Son is eternal, then he’ll boot me form this room (I guess he's afraid of me as he can't refute my claims directly which is why he ducks most of the content of my posts). So what your claiming isn’t Oneness Theology at all – according to Praxeas. For my part I also do believe that the Son is eternal; John 17:5, 17:24, Hebrews 1:2, Colossians 1:16-17, for Yahweh God cannot exist without his divine attributes as cults such as the Unitarians and Christadelphians claim. So Mr Blume, please join Praxeas and myself in affirming Christ’s eternal Sonship.

I tried to start a new post titled; Is the Son an Eternal Son, but I'm restricted and so wasn't able to do this. What I was hoping to do was to take 3 divine attributes: Creatorship, Eternity and Omnipresence and see how the Oneness and Trinitarians in this room defined both the father and the Son according to these three divine attributes. For my part I apply all three attributes to the Father and then both affirm and deny all three attributes for the Son, so as God (SON) is Eternal, Omnipresent and Creator, whilst as a man he's neither Creator, not Omnipresent or Eterenal. Hey it would make a fine new thread.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

Actually Praxeas has told me that all Oneness Pentecostals believe that the Son has existed eternally and so is an eternal Son. He has warned me that if I ever say that Oneness Pentecostals deny the fact that the Son is eternal, then he’ll boot me form this room (I guess he's afraid of me as he can't refute my claims directly which is why he ducks most of the content of my posts).

Robert that is your last lie. Your next one will earn you a boot from the room. I never once said all OPs believed the Son is an Eternal Son nor did I say all OPs believe that the Son has existed Eternally NOR did I warn you that I would boot you if you ever say that OPs deny that fact. I am sending this to you in PM to to warn you. Your next visit here better have a change of attitude or you are gone from this forum for good, again.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder

Actually Praxeas has told me that all Oneness Pentecostals believe that the Son has existed eternally and so is an eternal Son. He has warned me that if I ever say that Oneness Pentecostals deny the fact that the Son is eternal, then he’ll boot me form this room (I guess he's afraid of me as he can't refute my claims directly which is why he ducks most of the content of my posts).

Aside from your unethical behaviour on a forum operated in part by Praxeas, I see you have spoken a lie according to Praxeas:

Robert that is your last lie. ...I never once said all OPs believed the Son is an Eternal Son nor did I say all OPs believe that the Son has existed Eternally NOR did I warn you that I would boot you if you ever say that OPs deny that fact.

Bladder, you really should take notice of yoru behaviour, for true believers know other true believers by their fruits, and you are lying. Taht tells me a lot.

For my part I also do believe that the Son is eternal; John 17:5, 17:24, Hebrews 1:2, Colossians 1:16-17, for Yahweh God cannot exist without his divine attributes as cults such as the Unitarians and Christadelphians claim. So Mr Blume, please join Praxeas and myself in affirming Christ’s eternal Sonship.

The Son is not eternal, and had a beginning since there is no eternal mother.

I like what Adam clarke said:

Two natures must ever be distinguished in Christ: the human nature, in reference to which he is the Son of God and inferior to him, Mar_13:32; Joh_5:19; Joh_14:28, and the Divine nature which was from eternity, and equal to God, Joh_1:1; Joh_10:30; Rom_9:5; Col_1:16-18. It is true, that to Jesus the Christ, as he appeared among men, every characteristic of the Divine nature is sometimes attributed, without appearing to make any distinction between the Divine and human natures; but is there any part of the Scriptures in which it is plainly said that the Divine nature of Jesus was the Son of God? Here, I trust, I may be permitted to say, with all due respect for those who differ from me, that the doctrine of the eternal Sonship of Christ is, in my opinion, anti-scriptural, and highly dangerous. This doctrine I reject for the following reasons: -
1st. I have not been able to find any express declaration in the Scriptures concerning it.
2dly. If Christ be the Son of God as to his Divine nature, then he cannot be eternal; for son implies a father; and father implies, in reference to son, precedency in time, if not in nature too. Father and son imply the idea of generation; and generation implies a time in which it was effected, and time also antecedent to such generation.
3dly. If Christ be the Son of God, as to his Divine nature, then the Father is of necessity prior, consequently superior to him.
4thly. Again, if this Divine nature were begotten of the Father, then it must be in time; i.e. there was a period in which it did not exist, and a period when it began to exist. This destroys the eternity of our blessed Lord, and robs him at once of his Godhead.
5thly. To say that he was begotten from all eternity, is, in my opinion, absurd; and the phrase eternal Son is a positive self-contradiction. Eternity is that which has had no beginning, nor stands in any reference to Time. Son supposes time, generation, and father; and time also antecedent to such generation. Therefore the conjunction of these two terms, Son and eternity is absolutely impossible, as they imply essentially different and opposite ideas.
The enemies of Christ’s Divinity have, in all ages, availed themselves of this incautious method of treating this subject, and on this ground, have ever had the advantage of the defenders of the Godhead of Christ. This doctrine of the eternal Sonship destroys the deity of Christ; now, if his deity be taken away, the whole Gospel scheme of redemption is ruined. On this ground, the atonement of Christ cannot have been of infinite merit, and consequently could not purchase pardon for the offenses of mankind, nor give any right to, or possession of, an eternal glory. The very use of this phrase is both absurd and dangerous; therefore let all those who value Jesus and their salvation abide by the Scriptures. This doctrine of the eternal Sonship, as it has been lately explained in many a pamphlet, and many a paper in magazines, I must and do consider as an awful heresy, and mere sheer Arianism; which, in many cases, has terminated in Socinianism, and that in Deism. From such heterodoxies, and their abetters, may God save his Church! Amen!

I tried to start a new post titled; Is the Son an Eternal Son, but I'm restricted and so wasn't able to do this. What I was hoping to do was to take 3 divine attributes: Creatorship, Eternity and Omnipresence and see how the Oneness and Trinitarians in this room defined both the father and the Son according to these three divine attributes. For my part I apply all three attributes to the Father and then both affirm and deny all three attributes for the Son

Your mother of errors is that you do not extrapoliate back further and realize there is a PERSON behind the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and this SINGLE PERSON holds all these attrobutes.

But until you realize there are not three persons, you will never see it.

Take care.