Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple
Your version is exactly what the Trins teach. Jesus is the Eternal Son. Scripture teaches he is the Eternal Father and the begotten son.
Also according to that what happened to FATHER OF ETERNITY? I find nothing in that phrase that weakens the truth that Messiah is the Father. It only strongly reinforces it!
|
I was straining to be a bit coy with the earlier post. My understanding is that "the Son" had a beginning and thus, is not eternal.
Luke 1:32: When the child was born He was "called the son of the Highest." The angel's words, "He shall be called..." indicates a temporal beginning.
Psalm 2:7: "This day..." also indicates a time within our present temporal continuum and thus is "outside of eternity." The Psalmist here is obviously referring to himself (see also
Psalm 89:20-27... "I will make him my firstborn..."). However...
Acts 13:33: Paul applies
Psalm 2:7 to Jesus Christ and is clearly indicating that the "This day..." of the Psalm is the day in which Jesus was raised from the dead.
So, even though "the day" of "the Son's" begetting appears to have multiple applications, all of those applications fall within the realm of "time" and not eternity.
You are correct in pointing out that there are many sources which are in agreement with the "Everlasting Father" translation. However, even as you have pointed out, there are many which prefer the "Father of Eternity" translation. And, the "Father of Eternity" partisans generally represent the more recent scholarship on this issue.
For a Trinitarian, to say that "The Son" Who created all things and by Whom all things were created is also the "Source" of eternity does nothing to weaken the Trinitarian case. And to say "Father of Eternity"
is the same as to say "the Source of eternity." In this application
it is not an identification of the "The Son" as being the same "Person" and the Father.
Threaded Mode
