Christ is God

It is expedient for me to venture deeply on the topic of the Son's begetting by presenting a cogent argument because Con hasn't been satisfied in my arguments. On the Sonship of Christ Throughout Scripture, it is shown that God has many sons and offspring: The Nation of Israel (Exodus 4:22)- Israel prefigures the real Son who is to come. The evidence of this is Hosea 11:1 in which it wasn't only about the Nation of Israel but about Jesus as well based on Matthew 2:15."Out of Egypt I called my Son"Israel kings ( Psalm 2:7) -Kings of Israel aren't of same nature with God. They just have the title Son of God as a prefigure of the pre-existent Christ, the real Son of God, who is to come. The evidence of this is explicit in Psalm 110:3 ( LXX) wherein it says that the Messiah is pre-existent and is a begotten Son. Truly, having known the pre-existent Son, these kings anticipate the coming of the Messiah via the incarnation.Angels are sons of God (Job 38:7)- angels aren't begotten sons but rather, they are created sons as Hebrews 1:7 clearly says. Humans are God's offspring (Acts 17:28)- humans aren't of same nature with God. They aren't begotten from him but rather,they are of the dust ( Eccesiastes 3:20). Christians( 1 John 3:1)- Christians are begotten of God by faith in the Son ( John 1:12-13). Christ is begotten of God from his very substance.Christ (2 John 1:3)- only Christ is the "only begotten one who is *God by nature"( John 1:18). No one else is begotten in the same sense as he is. In the entire Scriptures, only Christ is called "monogenes theos" ( only begotten , God in essence).John 1:18 is explicit, it speaks of the begotten Son who is of same nature with the Father. Notice that John 1:1 also speaks of the same, "The Word was *God by nature." In fact, Phillippians 2:6 is pretty straightforward, it says that Christ is " in very nature, God."* both occurences of the Greek word "theos" ( God) in John 1:1 and John 1:18 are "anarthrous" ( without the Greek definite article) and hence, the noun "God" functions as an adjective. It means the whole qualities i.e. nature of God.The day Jesus was resurrected was the day he shares in the divine nature ( 2 Peter 1:4) of immortality ( in reference to his human nature not his divine nature). He was begotten from the dead through his resurrection means that his human nature was glroified and hence, he has now a glrofied body. The same begetting will be experienced by all Christians ( 2 Peter 1:4). Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is ( 1 John 3:2 --> 1 Corinthians chapter 15). Who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power that enables him evento subject all things to himself (Philippians 3:21).But that's only one sense of it, the other sense is that he's of same nature with the Father. Romans 1:4 speaks of this truth: " declared ( not made) Son of God with power." The fact that the first sense only covers entering glory proves that the second sense is solely referring to Jesus alone for he alone is "the Annointed One." Psalm 2:7 (LXX) is quoted in these three New Testament Scriptures:Hebrews 1:5 about eternal generation ( sonship)Hebrews 5:5 about priesthood ( sonship)Acts 13:35 about kingship ( sonship)It is because the begotten Son is the Messiah based on Psalm 110:3 (LXX). The Messiah is the only begotten one who is God by nature ( John 1:18) that is why he is Priest and King (and many more). On the Omniscience of the SonThe Son knows all things for he is God by nature( John 1:1). He took upon himself human nature ( Philippians 2:7). Human nature includes growth in all aspects of its existence ( Luke 5:22).Jesus is only one person with dual natures: divine and human ( Colossians 2:9).The natural consequence of having a human nature is to enter experiential knowledge. Jesus did cooperate with the limitations of being a man. He voluntarily concealed his omniscience in order to live truly as man.At age 12, Jesus is already aware that he is God's Son, of same nature with God ( Luke 2:49-50). Therefore, he knows that he has divine nature. He knows that he can know everything. He has the ability but he doesn't have authority to use it because he depended on his Father's will ( John 5:19). This fact is explicit on Mark 13:32. The Son doesn't know the day and the hour of his own return. Unlike in other circumstances wherein he evinces his omniscience ( John 1:43-51, 2:25, Mark 14:29-30), in this and this alone is where he does not show it.After the resurrection, he was given all authority in heaven and on earth to use his abilities ( Matthew 28:18) and we are now sure that he knows the day and the hourn of his own return based on Colossians 2:3:"In him lie hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."( Colossians 2:3)In fact, we have at least one explcit Bible verse that speaks of Christ as omniscient : The Father:1 Chronicles 28:9 . . . the LORD searches all hearts, . . .Psalm 139:3 Thou searchest out my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways.Romans 8:27 . . . he who searches the hearts of men . . . The Son: I am he who searches mind and heart ( Revelation 2:23).Truly, they are of same nature! On Hebrews 1:3My case:I am so sorry about talking about how the copy was made. I just mean it metaphorically because we are not talking about photocopying via xerox but rather, we're talking about the nature of the Father and the Son via begetting. Still, I admit that it's not a so-good-argument at all because in Hebrews 1:3,I found out that we're not talking about making copies. Copy is a noun not a verb! Con's case:The copy is not the original.The Son's nature is a copy of the Father's nature.Therefore, the Son is not of same nature with the Father. This is how I understood Con's argument. Literally interpreted, it shows that the nature was duplicated into two. We have now two natures. Honestly, this freaks me out.I admit that this is a very possible interpretation and literal at best but because it cannot contradict other explicit scripture, another interpretation is needed.The NIV renders it as " exact representation of his being." It means that the Son represents all of what the Father is. How is he representing the Father's nature? It is by his actions which is evidently divine for "he only does what the Father does" ( John 5:19).ORIf we interpret ESV's rendering " exact imprint of his nature", in a Trinitarian way, then, this is only by metaphor: Both the Father and the Son are of same nature because the Son perfectly ( as a stamp into a coin/letter) has the nature of the Father.