# Son vs sons of God?



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2017)

In a debate whether the Son of God preexisted  before his incarnation as a man, the question was brought up on how do we compare the sons of God to that Son.

Were those sons of God a god to anyone?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2017)

This was asked of me?

"And I will ask you the same question I ask Hobbs who were the sons of God that is spoken of in the Old Testament were they God to, I know the answer but I would like to see if you know."

I see this as two questions. One did the last Adam precede the existence of the first Adam in more than Word? 

Next, what is the difference from the only begotton Son of God compared to the other sons of God? I have no idea who the sons of God were the gods to.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2017)

One more question, how can Jesus be the only begotten Son of God if he has always existed in more than Word? 
Is that a mystery we can not understand? 

If Jesus is the only Son of God, how did he always exist? God could not Father him later. Who was his always being eternal Mother?

Wouldn't that eternal Mother have to be deity?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2017)

Acts 17:31
For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead."

This man had an earthly Mother. Who was his always existing spiritual Mother of deity?


----------



## hobbs27 (Jan 31, 2017)

In his article, “The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4,” John Walton argues against interpreting the “sons of God” in Genesis 6 as angels. Rather, he proposes that the identification of the “sons of God” is best made in light of parallels between Genesis 6 and the Epic of Gilgamesh. Walton argues that these parallels, along with information from several other ANE sources, provide a historical picture in which the most likely identification of the “sons of God” is ANE kings.

http://stevegalt.blogspot.com/2009/12/article-review-walton-john-h-sons-of.html?m=1


----------



## hobbs27 (Jan 31, 2017)

Artfuldodger said:


> Acts 17:31
> For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead."
> 
> This man had an earthly Mother. Who was his always existing spiritual Mother of deity?



 Does the Father have a mother,  if not,  why would the Son require one?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2017)

hobbs27 said:


> Does the Father have a mother,  if not,  why would the Son require one?



Why did Jesus have an earthly Mother? He didn't have an earthly father. 

The Father isn't our actual father. He is the actual Father of his only "begotten" Son. God begat Jesus. We haven't always existed. We became sons when our fathers started the process with our mothers. We weren't spiritual sons that always existed.

This could be in Word only instead of actuality. In this respect he was Jesus' Father in respect to his future birth with Mary as his one and only Mother. Perhaps


----------



## hobbs27 (Jan 31, 2017)

Artfuldodger said:


> Why did Jesus have an earthly Mother? He didn't have an earthly father.
> 
> The Father isn't our actual father. He is the actual Father of his only "begotten" Son. God begat Jesus.
> 
> This could be in Word only instead of actuality. In this respect he was Jesus' Father in respect to his future birth with Mary as his one and only Mother.




He was sent from heaven ( pre existed)  and was manifested in the flesh.  His earthly Mother was a virgin... Explain that.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2017)

hobbs27 said:


> He was sent from heaven ( pre existed)  and was manifested in the flesh.  His earthly Mother was a virgin... Explain that.



Then what you are saying is we can't explain the preexisting Son who became a son before he had a virgin Mother? Not only did he become a son without a mother, he has always been a son. The only begotten Son of God.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jan 31, 2017)

Artfuldodger said:


> Then what you are saying is we can't explain the preexisting Son who became a son before he had a virgin Mother? Not only did he become a son without a mother, he has always been a son. The only begotten Son of God.



Pretty much .


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2017)

Terms such as "Father" and "Son," descriptive of God and Jesus, are human terms that help us understand the relationship between the different Persons of the Trinity.

"Only begotten" is interpreted from the Greek word monogenes. This could mean that Jesus is just unique and not begotten.

https://www.gotquestions.org/only-begotten-son.html

I'm going to have to disagree. I feel that it is important for us to believe that Jesus is the actual Son of God. I believe he has always existed in Word but became the Son when he came from Heaven within the Spirit of God.

I do understand that I can't explain this any better than one explains the Trinity or Oneness. I like to think I'm somewhere in between those two concepts. To include Oneness and Unity.

We do tend to separate more than unite God's existence.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2017)

Oneness has God becoming human instead of an always existing 1/3 of the Godhead becoming human. That Jesus is God incarnate instead of an always existing Son who became incarnate.

I've always had this picture in my head that it happened more like Oneness than an always existing Son. I don't feel like that idea is any easier to explain than the more believed Trinity.

I guess most folks find the Trinity easier to believe. I was raised a Trinitarian but have always struggled with the concept.

In Oneness, Jesus did not preexist but in Word only. He didn't become the Son until he was born of a woman.


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 1, 2017)

Artfuldodger said:


> Oneness has God becoming human instead of an always existing 1/3 of the Godhead becoming human. That Jesus is God incarnate instead of an always existing Son who became incarnate.
> 
> I've always had this picture in my head that it happened more like Oneness than an always existing Son. I don't feel like that idea is any easier to explain than the more believed Trinity.
> 
> ...



The fact that the Son,  The Father,  and The Spirit all interreact with one another in the Gospel themes makes that a very hard sell for me.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 1, 2017)

hobbs27 said:


> The fact that the Son,  The Father,  and The Spirit all interreact with one another in the Gospel themes makes that a very hard sell for me.



I agree but how does that explain that they always existed?


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 1, 2017)

John 17:5 "Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 1, 2017)

hobbs27 said:


> John 17:5 "Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.



John 17:22
I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 1, 2017)

hobbs27 said:


> John 17:5 "Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.



I wonder why Jesus didn't say, before I came down from Heaven instead of "before the world was?"

Is this a "time" within a preexistence or an "out of time" within the word?


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 1, 2017)

Maybe you prefer this?  
John 3:13 No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 1, 2017)

John 17:24
Father, I want those You have given Me to be with Me where I am, that they may see the glory You gave Me because You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

Romans 8:30
And those He predestined He also called, those He called He also justified, those He justified He also glorified.

1 John 3:2
Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.

Luke 20:36
In fact, they can no longer die, because they are like the angels. And since they are sons of the resurrection, they are sons of God.

There is some type of pre-existance. There is some type of unity. We will all return to or go to be within this glory. Perhaps it's a future return to our pre-existance.

There is no doubt about it as John 17:22 explains; God gave Jesus his glory. God gave 1/3 of the Godhead, his glory before the world began.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 1, 2017)

hobbs27 said:


> Maybe you prefer this?
> John 3:13 No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.



God is the Father of Jesus. Jesus had to come from Heaven.
He is the Son of God, how else would he get here? Does that explain that he came with the dna of a man from heaven or that he came within his Father's Spirit?

It's a manifestation of divine power.  He was conceived by the Holy Spirit. God was his source. It's written by Jews. You know how they write.

Example;

In Matthew 21:25, Jesus asked;
John's baptism--where did it come from? Was it from heaven, or of human origin?" They discussed it among themselves and said, "If we say, 'From heaven,' he will ask, 'Then why didn't you believe him?'


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 1, 2017)

Hobbs, it appears the line one draws to believe Jesus was 1/3 of an always equal part of the Godhead with his Father is as crookedly drawn as the futurist line.

First you have to take away the power and glory from this 1/3 of the Godhead that he has always had, always, when he incarnates as a man. Next the 1/3 of the Godhead which is his Father, has to give him the power that was just removed by the incarnation. Why remove it in the first place only to replace it from another third of the same entity?

Jesus repeatedly says that he does nothing without the power of his Father. Yet at one time he was equal to his Father. The word Father even shows a superiority over the word son. A father is superior in power to a son. 

Hebrews 1:3-5
3The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His nature, upholding all things by His powerful word. After He had provided purification for sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. 4So He became as far superior to the angels as the name He has inherited is excellent beyond theirs. 5For to which of the angels did God ever say: “You are my Son; today I have become Your Father”? Or again: “I will be His Father, and He will be My Son”?

I can't help but read that God is a higher power than Jesus. That Jesus got all of his power, glory, essence, being, likeness, etc. from His Father.

Giving up all of this equal power as 1/3 of the Godhead is a concept that is hard to grasp. When the 1/3 Jesus part incarnate, did that leave only a duality in power? God and the Holy Spirit? Yet if Jesus was always equal, this leaves a time within eternity that he wasn't.


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 1, 2017)

Art... There's no straight line though. I see no reason to dismiss the Trinity because I can't disprove it. Some explanations.... Most I believe even leave the Christianity camp. 
Example would be JWs belief that Jesus is the arch Angel Michael... 
That cannot be Christianity.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 1, 2017)

hobbs27 said:


> Art... There's no straight line though. I see no reason to dismiss the Trinity because I can't disprove it. Some explanations.... Most I believe even leave the Christianity camp.
> Example would be JWs belief that Jesus is the arch Angel Michael...
> That cannot be Christianity.



Do you feel the same about Oneness? Definitely no straight line regardless of Oneness or the Trinity. Oneness has the issue as you mentioned of the Father and Son communicating with each other after the incarnation.

I can't dismiss the fact that if one believes Jesus died for his sins, what else is required? Most people are called or believe before they understand much more than Jesus as the Messiah. 

Imagine how hard to teach a native islander 300 years ago. First, he wouldn't even understand English. So you finally teach him about God. Then you teach him about Jesus dying for his sins. Salvation first and then the Trinity or Oneness will come later.


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 1, 2017)

I honestly believe man is not saved by knowledge alone.  Upon hearing of Jesus the Spirit will draw them to the faith.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 1, 2017)

hobbs27 said:


> I honestly believe man is not saved by knowledge alone.  Upon hearing of Jesus the Spirit will draw them to the faith.



It has to be that way. We have to be lead by God. With all of the denominations and beliefs we have, it has to be by grace alone. Actually man having all of these various beliefs is proof in God's election.
Man is a failure, We believe what our parents believe. We are blinded by our indoctrination. We are all born Hindus and other non-believers. It takes God to open our hearts and lead us to him through Jesus.

Our beliefs are a form of works. Perhaps to the point of pride. We even go so far as to exclude others. Others that were lead to Jesus by God. Others to include brothers. Brothers who yearn to see the Father and the Son.

sons of God seeing the Son. Becoming like the Son. Seeing the Father when we see the Son.

1 John 3:2
Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.

You do believe we'll see the Father and Son? We will have both, right?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 3, 2017)

Banjo Picker said:


> Adam was not the first son of God to be created. There were many sons of God called angels who were created before Adam. They were present when God laid the foundations of the Earth (Job 38:4-7; Col. 1:16-18). Adam was the first son of God created of the human race (Luke 3:38), but there were innumerable created sons of God in Heaven and in Earth before Adam. The pre-Adamite races and all spirit-beings were created of God and therefore His sons by creation.



Did they call him Father? Did the Father call them Son? Were they unique, begotten, or monogenes? 
Were those sons different from the Son?


----------

