Featured Is the Doctrine of the Trinity wrong? (Eternal Generation/ eternally begotten)

It does.

God spoke.
Through the Word all things were made.

 

It actually does. The problem is you (and Martin) confuse the word "son" with the Incarnation (a different topic).

Eternal Generation is not dealing with Jesus as man (the Incarnation) but Jesus as God (His divinity and relationship in the Trinity).


You insist that Jesus' relationship within the Trinity changed at the Incarnation, but you have failed to prove that by Scripture.

Eternal Generation is the truth that Jesus us Eternally the Word - by being born as God's Son His relationship as YHWH within the Trinity did not change.

Eternal Generation is the ONLY view that presents YHWH as Eternal in the sense YHWH does not change (the Trinity remains constant).

 

??

God did not write Creation into existence.

What on earth are you talking about????

 

No, Eternal Generation is Biblical.

The problem is you developed your understanding over 30 years ago. God Himself can (and has) told you that it is wrong but we both know you will not be persuaded.

You insist that YHWH is not Eternal but changes in nature (the opposite of Eternal Generation).

Prove that the nature of God (of the Trinity) has changed.

 

@37818

This is getting old. Let's settle it once and for all.

Eternal Generation is that YHWH is eternal in divine nature.

Jesus remained Yahweh, without change in this respect.

Jesus being born in the flesh as the Son of God DID NOT change His Divine nature and identity in the Godhead.


Either the nature of the Trinity changed or it did not.

Eternal Generation is the doctrine that the nature of the Trinity did not change with the Incarnation.

You reject that doctrine.

Show us in Scripture that the Incarnation is a change in the nature of the Trinity.

Show us in Scripture that the Incarnation means Jesus' divine nature as Yahweh, in the Godhead, was changed.

You will not change my mind because too many passages are against you. God does not change. But I am interested in understanding the view you came up with all those years ago.

 

This proves you fo mot understand the doctrine.

You need to study doctrines from those who affirm them instead of from those who reject them in order to prevent this mistake.

It was an easily avoidable error.

Eternal Generation is the doctrine that the Son IS eternally Yahweh.

The Word became flesh, but this did not equate to a change in the Trinity.

Jesus' divine nature and place within the Godhead DID NOT change.


That is the Biblical truth you are trying to argue gainst.

So argue against it legitimately.

Show us how Yahweh is not eternally immutable in nature.

Tell us how the nature of the Trinity was altered by the Incarnation.

If you cannot then you have no ground to stand on. You just reject the orthodox Christian faith to rebel against Scripture.


By your replies you seem to actually believe Eternal Generation. You just do not seem to understand the doctrine.

The reason I say this is you respond by affirming Eternal Generation while stating you font believe it.

And when faced with the doctrine you can only reply with "no way".


The point of Eternal Generation IS that Yahweh is eternal and did not change when the Word became flesh.

 

Ahhhhhh.....Thanks. Now I can see it. I assumed @37818 held the Doctrine of the Trinity with the exception of Eternal Generation. And since he kept repeating Eternal Generation points as his view I did not make that connection.

I believe Genesis disproves his theory. The reason is we see the Trinity at work (God speaking, it bring done through that Word, and the movement of the Spirit).

I hold the understanding that the Trinity is eternal (Eternal Generation and Eternal Procession). I do so because I see this all over Scripture (Creation, the giving of the Law, etc.). I believe that we do have Christophanies. I also believe that the Word was with God and was God, and that God sent His Son into the World. Also, I believe that the Doctrine of the Trinity prevents heresies regarding the Godhead.

Is there a name for the doctrine that the One God became three Persons?

 

That is not a change in the nature of God (between the Persons of the Trinity).

@canadyjd helped me out. I think k I understand your position.

The problem I have with it are passages like John 1. The Word was God and the Word was with God. I believe this affirms distinct Persons in One God. In Genesis we also have the Spirit moving.

So while I reject the idea that God became a trinity, and I view that as a denial (obviously) of the Doctrine of the Trinity, I grant you are not rejecting that Jesus is God.


The difference between our beliefs is simply that I believe in an eternally triune God.

 

I agree.

I think the argument has become whether God is the Eternal triune God or if He became a triune God.

My belief is that the Trinity is Eternal and therefore the position or roles of the Father, Son, and Spirit are eternal.

 

You say that the Second Person of the Trinity changed within the Trinity. That is becoming something different.