"Begotten", what does it mean?

[Soapy]

.
Right you are.. Thomas Believed "Jesus is God" because Thomas could see Jesus was His God!
‘Are you only believing that it is me because you saw and touched me…!’

Soapy EXACLY you said it yourself... ... You are NOT blessed!
Christians are blessed because they BELIEVE Jesus is God without seeing Jesus!
‘BLESSED ARE THOSE (Christians) WHO DID NOT SEE [NOR TOUCH] AND YET BELIEVE’

Soapy Christians have always believed Jesus is God! Christians have always believed Jesus is the God of Thomas!

No! Thomas BELIEVED that Jesus was risen…. That was the context of the event.

The other ten disciples told Thomas that Jesus had risen from the grave and they themselves had seen him when he appeared to them in the upper room.

Thomas, ever the doubter, says he would not believe that Jesus had risen unless he saw for himself and touched him.

Jesus appeared again in the upper room, this time when Thomas was there.

Thomas was invited to touch Jesus to see he was NOT A SPIRIT (GOD IS SPIRIT) and feel the place where Jesus had been pierced by the nails on the Cross and the spear from the soldier.

On gaining complete evidence of the reality of Jesus’ rise from the grave as told you him by the other disciples, Thomas exclaimed a belief.

Jesus was displeased that Thomas had only believed BECAUSE he had seen and touched him. Jesus said to him:

• “Have you believed because you have seen me?”

((The ‘Seen’ must, by implication, mean, ‘By sight and touch’ since we can see from the text that Thomas was invited to touch Jesus to prove he was real. Jesus assured Thomas that he, Jesus, WAS NOT A SPIRIT! Do we not know and believe that GOD IS SPIRIT!?))

Jesus went on to say to Thomas:

• “blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

This is the present ten disciples and those people who are yet to hear of the risen Christ: they will have believed WITHOUT having seen and touched Jesus. These are the ones who are BLESSED.

 

[sojourner]

You must be joking.

If it makes you feel better about yourself and enables you to save face here.

 

[sojourner]

I didn’t misquote … I paraphrased.

But if you think I’m wrong then present the exact verse - as you see it(?) and let’s see if there a difference to my paraphrase!

Actual quote:
“Jesus said to him, ‘Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe.’”

Your “paraphrase”:
Are you only believing that it is me because you saw and touched me…!’

Jesus ADMONISHED HIM for this.

THEN Jesus said: ‘BLESSED ARE THOSE WHO DID NOT SEE [NOR TOUCH] AND YET BELIEVE’

A paraphrase retains the original meaning. Jesus is not admonishing him. Jesus is making a commentary on the faith of later believers. Your insertion of the word “only” serves to belittle Thomas in a way that just isn’t present in the text. You’re twisting the meaning.

 

[Soapy]

If it makes you feel better about yourself and enables you to save face here.

Does that mean you agree with the FACTS…. That’s a first for you, isn’t it?

But just to continue the delightfully instructive discussion for a while longer, what do you say to this extract from Wikipedia:

• “The original Hebrew term śāṭān (Hebrew: שָׂטָן) is a generic noun meaning "accuser" or "adversary",[7][8]which is used throughout the Hebrew Bible to refer to ordinary human adversaries,[9][8] as well as a specific supernatural entity.[9][8] The word is derived from a verb meaning primarily "to obstruct, oppose".[10] When it is used without the definite article (simply satan), the word can refer to any accuser,[9] but when it is used with the definite article (ha-satan), it usually refers specifically to the heavenly accuser: the satan.[9]
  
  The word with the definite article Ha-Satan (Hebrew: הַשָּׂטָן) occurs 17 times in the Masoretic Text, in two books of the Hebrew Bible: Job ch. 1–2 (14×) and Zechariah 3:1–2 (3×).[11] [12] It is translated in English bibles mostly as 'Satan' (18x in Book of Job, I Books of Chronicles and Book of Zechariah).
  
  The word without the definite article is used in 10 instances, of which two are translated diabolos in the Septuagint. It is translated in English Bibles as 'an accuser' (1x) but mostly as 'an adversary' (9x as in Book of Numbers, 1 & 2 Samuel and 1 Kings).
  
  • 1 Chronicles 21:1, "Satan stood up against Israel" (KJV) or "And there standeth up an adversary against Israel" (Young's Literal Translation)[13]
  • Psalm 109:6b "and let Satan stand at his right hand" (KJV)[14] or "let an accuser stand at his right hand." (ESV, etc.)
  The word does not occur in the Book of Genesis, which mentions only a talking serpent and does not identify the serpent with any supernatural entity.[15] The first occurrence of the word "satan" in the Hebrew Bible in reference to a supernatural figure comes from Numbers 22:22,[16] which describes the Angel of Yahweh confronting Balaam on his donkey:[6]"Balaam's departure aroused the wrath of Elohim, and the Angel of Yahweh stood in the road as a satan against him."[16] In 2 Samuel 24, Yahweh sends the "Angel of Yahweh" to inflict a plague against Israel for three days, killing 70,000 people as punishment for David having taken a census without his approval.[17] 1 Chronicles 21:1 repeats this story,[17] but replaces the "Angel of Yahweh" with an entity referred to as "a satan".[17]”

‘A Satan’ and ‘The Satan’… NAME or TITLE…?

‘A God’ and ‘The God’… Name or Title…?

‘An Apple’… ‘The Apple’…
Title of the fruit (Type of fruit) : Apple
Name of fruit (Specific kind): Granny Smiths
Office of Administration / Designation: For Cooking in pies etc.

Species of Being: ‘Man’
Personal identifier (Name): ‘John’
Office of Administration / Designation: ‘The Baptiser’

Species of Being: ‘God’ (A God; The God)
Name of Being: ‘Yhwh’
Office of Administration / Designation: ‘The Father’ (Creator; Sustainer; Saviour)

Species of Being: ‘Man’
Name of Being: ‘Jesus’
Office of Administration / Designation: ‘The Son’ (The Christ; Saviour; Shepherd; King; High Priest to God)


Species of Being: ‘An Angel; The Angel)
Name of Being: ‘Lucifer’
Office of Administration / Designation: ‘The Satan’ (Opposer; Devil)

 

[Soapy]

Actual quote:
“Jesus said to him, ‘Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe.’”

Your “paraphrase”:
Are you only believing that it is me because you saw and touched me…!’

Jesus ADMONISHED HIM for this.

THEN Jesus said: ‘BLESSED ARE THOSE WHO DID NOT SEE [NOR TOUCH] AND YET BELIEVE’

A paraphrase retains the original meaning. Jesus is not admonishing him. Jesus is making a commentary on the faith of later believers. Your insertion of the word “only” serves to belittle Thomas in a way that just isn’t present in the text. You’re twisting the meaning.

“Jesus is making a commentary on the faith of later believers’. Yes, absolutely… it is testament to the FACT that Thomas HAD TO SEE AND TOUCH before he believed…

The ones BLESSED are they who would not do as Thomas did…. So therefore Thomas IS NOT BEING BLESSED.

And as for my injection of ‘Only’… what did Thomas say to the disciples previously:

• “So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”

Therefore ONLY WHEN he did see and touch did he believe….

Thank you for pointing out your own error.

Keep this up and you’ll soon be telling the truth but calling it falsehood …. Have you been colluding with our Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, or his brother in arms, Donald Trump?

 

[sojourner]

Does that mean you agree with the FACTS…. That’s a first for you, isn’t it?

No, it means that I’m unwilling to quarrel further with delusional thinking. Everyone knows the accepted scholastic standards for study of ancient texts.

But just to continue the delightfully instructive discussion for a while longer, what do you say to this extract from Wikipedia:

• “The original Hebrew term śāṭān (Hebrew: שָׂטָן) is a generic noun meaning "accuser" or "adversary",[7][8]which is used throughout the Hebrew Bible to refer to ordinary human adversaries,[9][8] as well as a specific supernatural entity.[9][8] The word is derived from a verb meaning primarily "to obstruct, oppose".[10] When it is used without the definite article (simply satan), the word can refer to any accuser,[9] but when it is used with the definite article (ha-satan), it usually refers specifically to the heavenly accuser: the satan.[9]
  
  The word with the definite article Ha-Satan (Hebrew: הַשָּׂטָן) occurs 17 times in the Masoretic Text, in two books of the Hebrew Bible: Job ch. 1–2 (14×) and Zechariah 3:1–2 (3×).[11] [12] It is translated in English bibles mostly as 'Satan' (18x in Book of Job, I Books of Chronicles and Book of Zechariah).
  
  The word without the definite article is used in 10 instances, of which two are translated diabolos in the Septuagint. It is translated in English Bibles as 'an accuser' (1x) but mostly as 'an adversary' (9x as in Book of Numbers, 1 & 2 Samuel and 1 Kings).
  • 1 Chronicles 21:1, "Satan stood up against Israel" (KJV) or "And there standeth up an adversary against Israel" (Young's Literal Translation)[13]
  • Psalm 109:6b "and let Satan stand at his right hand" (KJV)[14] or "let an accuser stand at his right hand." (ESV, etc.)
  The word does not occur in the Book of Genesis, which mentions only a talking serpent and does not identify the serpent with any supernatural entity.[15] The first occurrence of the word "satan" in the Hebrew Bible in reference to a supernatural figure comes from Numbers 22:22,[16] which describes the Angel of Yahweh confronting Balaam on his donkey:[6]"Balaam's departure aroused the wrath of Elohim, and the Angel of Yahweh stood in the road as a satan against him."[16] In 2 Samuel 24, Yahweh sends the "Angel of Yahweh" to inflict a plague against Israel for three days, killing 70,000 people as punishment for David having taken a census without his approval.[17] 1 Chronicles 21:1 repeats this story,[17] but replaces the "Angel of Yahweh" with an entity referred to as "a satan".[17]”

1) The article says the same thing I said: the serpent in the Garden is not (according to Genesis) Satan. In fact, the serpent in the Garden isn’t even an “adversary,” or an “accuser.” From a literary stance, the character of the serpent in the story is identified as a pariah — a “trickster.” In fact, the serpent represents wisdom in the culture from which the creation myth is taken.

2) Satan (as used by most respondents here) is a supernatural figure. IOW, the character of the devil. People here contend that the devil was the serpent. According to Genesis, that is patently untrue. In fact, the “man” with whom Jacob wrestled at the ford of the Jabbok is described as an “adversary,” (or, as you put it, “a ‘satan.’”) Yet, most people interpret this adversary as “God,” and not as the devil. So, God (or “Wisdom,” in the case of the creation myth) can sometimes be an “adversary” — and an “accuser” — without being the devil.

 

[sojourner]

“Jesus is making a commentary on the faith of later believers’. Yes, absolutely… it is testament to the FACT that Thomas HAD TO SEE AND TOUCH before he believed…

The ones BLESSED are they who would not do as Thomas did…. So therefore Thomas IS NOT BEING BLESSED

Incorrect. The operative theological term here is “see.” Thomas saw. It’s a play on definitions. Thomas physically seeing refers to spiritual understanding. IOW, Thomas saw — understood who Jesus was. He was blessed in that coming to understanding. Again, in a play on terms, those who have not physically seen can still come to an understanding and be blessed for that.

And as for my injection of ‘Only’… what did Thomas say to the disciples previously:

• “So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”

Therefore ONLY WHEN he did see and touch did he believe….

Thank you for pointing out your own error

You’re forgetting that, regardless of how the understanding came about, it still came about, and THAT’S the theological point being made.

 

[2ndpillar]

I was wrong. This one may be the most screwy post I’ve ever read.

You might want to study actual world history before trying to educate the world with regard to your "screwy" point of view.

 

[Dogknox20]

SATAN is a TITLE. It means ‘Opposer [to truth]’

Any one who opposes truth is [A] SATAN.

Do you think that almighty God named his greatest and most glorious angel ‘Opposer’?

People and things are very often given a title because of something they did or do (or did not do).

John (Son of Zachariah) was given the title ‘[The] Baptist’ because he Baptised people.

The Bible Genesis writer wrote ‘Satan’ for the name of the fallen Angel because in the main Angels do not have names. They are known to God unlike the way humans need to know things by a name or title. See that Adam is not the name of the first human being. In Hebrew it is ‘Red Earth’… WE ADOPT the description, ‘Adam’, AS A NAME in our western culture.

I reply...
‘Satan’ is the name of the fallen Angel!

What the name means does NOT matter.. Satan is the Devil! Satan is the Snake in Genesis! Satan is the king of the Demons in Gehenna he is the boss!
Satan hates: He hates Love and he hates Christians!
Satan is the Anti-Christ!
The Anti-Christ is "Anti-Christian"!

Some names have meanings behind them.. SO WHAT!?
Abner means "my father is a light"!
Alan "little rock" or "handsome"
Curtis "courteous"
Edmund Means "rich protection"
Kendrick "royal power" or Cenric "bold power"'
Norbert meaning "north" or "bright"
Ogden meaning "oak valley"
etc
etc

A name is the Title of the Person! What the name means does NOT change the person!
Christians believe "Jesus is God"!
The Anti-Christ attacks Christians for their beliefs! He hates TRUTH! Satan is the father of LIES! Satan would never stop anyone from denying a Christian belief because that person is doing his work!

 

[sojourner]

You might want to study actual world history before trying to educate the world with regard to your "screwy" point of view.

You might want to do actual graduate work in church history with regard to your screwy post.

 

[Muffled]

I believe begotten means that it is a child that was produced. Usually that requires sex but in this case it did not.

 

[Muffled]

Nope, you got the meaning of Begat.
You should go and search homogenis.
"pertaining to being the only one of its kind within a specific relationship" and "pertaining to being the only one of its kind or class, unique in kind".
From WIKI.
anyhow, it has more to do with a special relationship, uniquness etc.

I believe homogenesis is not in my translation and begotten is.

 

[Muffled]

That is ridiculous.
If Jesus has "G-d's mind", he was then praying to himself?

..oh dear .. what lengths we go to, in order to keep an identity/tribe.
There are so many creeds, but we all claim that ours is correct.
I, for one, can't accept logical absurdities.

I believe that is because you know so little. Jesus has a mind as well as the Spirit of God. The mind can pray to the spirit. I wouldn't pray to my own spirit since he is not all that great but I would pray to the Spirit of God that resides in me.

 

[nPeace]

If it makes you feel better about yourself and enables you to save face here.

You are making me laugh so hard.
Anyone who treats scholars with different opinions... whose opinions they favor, as though they are gods, is deluded, in my opinion, or they just like being mentally blind.
Worst yet, that person is involved in some form of human worship. in my opinion.

If it makes you feel good about yourself, and you are so full of yourself, don't mind me. Keep right at it.

 

[pearl]

Mere Christianity, Lewis' definition 'begotten'
Jesus: Begotten Not Created - Official Site | CSLewis.com

 

[muhammad_isa]

Jesus has a mind as well as the Spirit of God...

..don't we all..

 

[Soapy]

No, it means that I’m unwilling to quarrel further with delusional thinking. Everyone knows the accepted scholastic standards for study of ancient texts.


1) The article says the same thing I said: the serpent in the Garden is not (according to Genesis) Satan. In fact, the serpent in the Garden isn’t even an “adversary,” or an “accuser.” From a literary stance, the character of the serpent in the story is identified as a pariah — a “trickster.” In fact, the serpent represents wisdom in the culture from which the creation myth is taken.

2) Satan (as used by most respondents here) is a supernatural figure. IOW, the character of the devil. People here contend that the devil was the serpent. According to Genesis, that is patently untrue. In fact, the “man” with whom Jacob wrestled at the ford of the Jabbok is described as an “adversary,” (or, as you put it, “a ‘satan.’”) Yet, most people interpret this adversary as “God,” and not as the devil. So, God (or “Wisdom,” in the case of the creation myth) can sometimes be an “adversary” — and an “accuser” — without being the devil.

So you are saying that God is Satan… in your words?

God IS an adversary against UNTRUTHFULNESS…. Against unrighteousness… but Satan is not interpreted that way… it is interpreted as an adversary AGAINST UNTRUTH… It is absolutely wrong to claim that an ADVERSARY AGAINST UNRIGHTEOUSNESS is ALSO a SATAN!!

THE SATAN is the Father of unrighteousness… the Father of the lie!

Do you see what is written: THE Satan… not A SATAN… is the Father of the lie.

A Satan is like a child, an offspring, a prodigy of THE SATAN… like Jesus said to some of the Jews:

• “You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” (John 8:44)

Would you say that because the Father of lies is called ‘Devil’ then that is his NAME… or would you say that ‘Devil’ is a title?

For unique entities there is only one - and that one us given the DEFINITE ARTICLE. All others are given the INDEFINITE ARTICLE.

See that our ONE TRUE GOD is ‘THE GOD’. There is only one of him. If there were any other God or Gods they would be referred to as ‘A God’ or ‘Those Gods’.

Can you show me a verse where Lucifer is called ‘THE SATAN’?

But then again, are you saying that ‘GOD’ is the … NAME … of God?

Read back over the quote I put in my post and see that what I am saying agrees with the quote.

The simple situation is that the TITLE ‘Satan’ is used so often for the fallen Angel that it has been taken as his name. You can’t see that … Knowing the actual name of the fallen Angel would only lead to glorifying his name by those who are of such nature. By NOT KNOWING his name such ones cannot glorify and worship him as worship could be carried out - only cause worship can occur. But he won’t mind because anything that takes the emphasis off the true worshipped one: THE almighty God, THE Father (His titles) : YHWH (His NAME), suits him!

 

[2ndpillar]

If it makes you feel better about yourself and enables you to save face here.

That is like the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[2ndpillar]

..don't we all..

I don't know. It appears most just follow their false leaders and using their minds would be a step to far.

 

[Soapy]

Mere Christianity, Lewis' definition 'begotten'
Jesus: Begotten Not Created - Official Site | CSLewis.com

Who is CS Lewis?

‘Begotten Not Created’… where is that quoted from in the scriptures? I’ve never seen that verse in any Bible.

Do all Christian’s not celebrate THE BIRTH of Jesus??? They call it CHRISTMAS….

So funny, you create a period of time to celebrate the creation and birth of Jesus Christ and then DENY the creation and birth of him.

Just as you celebrate the DEATH and RESURRECTION of Jesus Christ … and then DENY that Jesus died???… but agree that he was resurrected…!!

How strange Trinity is?