The Eternal Son of God

@kellyjay said
denying the truth
of scripture or altering the truth to suit one's self could yes, make one a heretic.

Well "denying the truth of scripture", here, means disagreeing with you, for example. Do divegeester's disagreements with you make him a "heretic"?

@sonship said
If you want to call it waffle then get use to me calling you what you are on this matter - a teacher of a heresy.

Does supposedly being "a teacher of a heresy" affect his "salvation" despite his belief in Jesus?

@fmf said
sonship and divegeester disagree over interpretation. Does that make divegeester a "heretic"?

I'm not passing judgment on either of them, I agree and disagree with both of them
from time to time. Our opinions verses what scripture says is the only thing that
matters here, nothing else. We all can disagree on scripture that alone doesn't turn
any of us into heretics.

@kellyjay said
I'm not passing judgment on either of them, I agree and disagree with both of them
from time to time. Our opinions verses what scripture says is the only thing that
matters here, nothing else. We all can disagree on scripture that alone doesn't turn
any of us into heretics.

Is sonship justified in calling divegeester a "heretic"?

@fmf said
Is sonship justified in calling divegeester a "heretic"?

KellyJay, I am asking your opinion.

@divegeester

As I’ve explained numerous times sonship, the Son is the Father revealed in the flesh. A different, but scripturally demonstrably temporary office.

For God to be manifest forever in the fallen man, the flesh of sin, the corrupted humanity or even the form of it would be temporary.

For God to be manifest in the glorified and resurrected flesh is eternal. That is me now meeting part way with Divegeester yet with an important distinction about the flesh.

Said another way, for the Father to be manifested in the redeemed, uplifted, sanctified, resurrected, glorified, human flesh is not temporary. And this is because the Father was manifested in the flesh in Christ (though sinless) and subsequently is manifested in the church, His body. This manifestation of God in humanity is to be eternal.

That's enough for this post.

the Son is the Father revealed in the flesh. A different, but scripturally demonstrably temporary office.

Here it matters what Dive has in mind when he says "the flesh". And as I contemplated this issue I see no way to discuss it in the shorter than 25 words desired by those who have tiny attention spans.

For instance this might be all then can take for one post.

the Son is the Father revealed in the flesh. A different, but scripturally demonstrably temporary office.

The term "flesh" has more than one usage in the Bible. One is it standing for the entire fallen humanity which was degraded and corrupted in the fall of Adam.

For Dive to say any manifestation of the Father in that flesh is temporary is correct.

But salvation of fallen men involves the sanctification, transformation, conformation, resurrection, and glorification of the humanity. For the Father to be manifested in that "flesh" (so to speak) is eternal.

I have to place flesh in quotation marks because it is difficult for me to speak of the resurrected glorified man as flesh in the same sense as the fallen man.

That's all some of you can take. End of post.

the Son is the Father revealed in the flesh. A different, but scripturally demonstrably temporary office.

The office of God being manifest in the glorified uplifted humanity is ETERNAL both in Jesus the Son of God and in the church the many sons (and daughters if you wish) of God.

Now we need a proof text which gets us almost there.

And confessedly, great is the mystery of godliness:

" He who was manifested in the flesh,
Justified in the Spirit,
Seen by angels,
Preached among the nations,
Believed on in the world,
Taken up in glory." (1 Timothy 3:16)

This is about God being manifested in the flesh.
Does anyone believe that the manifestation is TEMPORARY?

After this manifestation is "taken up in glory" would you believe it is terminated because it is a temporary manifestation ?

1.) It is not so easy because it is called "the MYSTERY of godliness".

2.) I see nothing indicating being taken up in glory is a temporary "office" of the resurrected and glorified God-man Christ.

That enough for this post.

the Son is the Father revealed in the flesh. A different, but scripturally demonstrably temporary office.

So part of the problem I have in analyzing this is - It depends on what is meant by "the flesh".

I have submitted First Timothy 3:16 showing the manifestation of God in the flesh is taken up in glory. But we have to understand that this involves resurrection, transfiguration, glorification, This human nature is not at all exactly as what "flesh" we all come out of the human womb with.

The manifestation of the Father's life in uplifted and glorified "flesh" (if you will) is to be an eternal manifestation.

It continues in Jesus Christ the Son. And it is enlarged and expanded into His "Wife" and "Bride" the city of New Jerusalem.

This is a corporate entity to MATCH what He is forever. Neither the Bridegroom or the Wife are temporary manifestations of the Father in humanity.

the Son is the Father revealed in the flesh. A different, but scripturally demonstrably temporary office.

There is a strange similarity between ThinkOfOne's Christology and Divegeester's. Both of them seem to say the ministry of Jesus is terminated.

ThinkOfOne terminates Christ's ministry after His death by crucifixion (if you are ever able to pin him down).
Divegeester seems to want to assign temporariness to Christ's ministry after He delivers up the kingdom to His Father at the end of the 1,000 year millennium.

Both want a TEMPORARY Son of Man or TEMPORARY Son of God. Dive argues that "eternal Son" is not written in the Bible. It appears his purpose for such a fact is that the Son is not eternal either in office or Person or both.

ThinkOfOne's teaching is more damnable.
Divegeester's teaching may be less so in that he might admit a death and resurrection for redemption.

The plan statements of the Bible indicate that whatever the Son's delivering up the kingdom to His God and Father means in First Corinthians 15:24 it cannot mean there is no "eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (2 Pet. 1:11) . What ever 1 Cor. 15:24 means it cannot contradict the Son of Man's "eternal dominion" (Dan. 7:14).

He says something like - "Well the Son will remain as a visible symbol."

In essence I think this is of the same nature as saying what ThinkOfOne says - after Jesus died all else is merely symbolic. Ie. He no longer has His ministry.

Cont. latter