TheLayman
05-10-2007, 09:15 AM
Hebrews 1:2 emphatically and without ambiguity attests to the Son’s activity in creation. Let’s look:
1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;
In has been said that the book of Hebrews could be names “The Superiority of Christ.” And the book of Hebrews begins with this theme. In times past God spoke at various times and various ways through the prophets, but in these last days “in His Son.” Someone in another thread said this would literally be “out of a Son,” but actually it would literally read “in Son.” There is no pronoun or article here. A.T. Robertson explains this succinctly:
In his Son (en uiwi). In sharp contrast to en toi� prophtai�. "The Old Testament slopes upward to Christ" (J. R. Sampey). No article or pronoun here with the preposition en, giving the absolute sense of "Son." Here the idea is not merely what Jesus said, but what he is (Dods), God's Son who reveals the Father (John 1:18 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=Joh+1:18)). "The revelation was a son-revelation" (Vincent).
If that’s not enough, verse 3 begins: Who (relative pronoun referring to the Son) being (Being (ὠν [ōn]). Absolute and timeless existence (present active participle of εἰμι [eimi] A.T Robertson).
But the important point insofar as the preexistent Son is this: The Son through whom God spoke in these last days is the Son through whom He made the world. Again, I would affirm and proclaim the Biblical truth that God made the world through His Son. This can not be so if God’s Son did not actually exist before the world (universe). But I will agree with what Scripture says, it is my doctrine, but Oneness dogma will disagree with not only me, but Scripture. How do you explain disagreeing with what Scripture explicitly states here?
Blessings,
TheLayman
1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;
In has been said that the book of Hebrews could be names “The Superiority of Christ.” And the book of Hebrews begins with this theme. In times past God spoke at various times and various ways through the prophets, but in these last days “in His Son.” Someone in another thread said this would literally be “out of a Son,” but actually it would literally read “in Son.” There is no pronoun or article here. A.T. Robertson explains this succinctly:
In his Son (en uiwi). In sharp contrast to en toi� prophtai�. "The Old Testament slopes upward to Christ" (J. R. Sampey). No article or pronoun here with the preposition en, giving the absolute sense of "Son." Here the idea is not merely what Jesus said, but what he is (Dods), God's Son who reveals the Father (John 1:18 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=Joh+1:18)). "The revelation was a son-revelation" (Vincent).
If that’s not enough, verse 3 begins: Who (relative pronoun referring to the Son) being (Being (ὠν [ōn]). Absolute and timeless existence (present active participle of εἰμι [eimi] A.T Robertson).
But the important point insofar as the preexistent Son is this: The Son through whom God spoke in these last days is the Son through whom He made the world. Again, I would affirm and proclaim the Biblical truth that God made the world through His Son. This can not be so if God’s Son did not actually exist before the world (universe). But I will agree with what Scripture says, it is my doctrine, but Oneness dogma will disagree with not only me, but Scripture. How do you explain disagreeing with what Scripture explicitly states here?
Blessings,
TheLayman