Is the Son of God His Own Existence?

Question:Using the law of transitivity, it evidently follows that if God is his own existence and the Son is God, then the Son is his own existence. But if the Son of God is his own existence, then it would seem that the Father is not the source of the Son's existence, is he?

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: Using the law of transitivity, it evidently follows that if God is his own existence and the Son is God, then the Son is his own existence. But if the Son of God is his own existence, then it would seem that the Father is not the source of the Son's existence, is he?

The trinity is not a Bible teaching.
http://www.watchtower.org/e/ti/article_0...

Jesus is separate from God. He is God's only begotten son. They are two different persons.

Come on it almost easter just know that he's there.

Hypostatic Union. You are correct, insofar as it pertains to the Sons Divine nature; however, Christ also possesses a complete human nature at the same time. Again, this is called the Hypostatic Union. Whatever we predicate of Christ must be done in such a way that we predicate it of his Divine and human natures--not just one.

I have read Gnostic scripture that explains that Jesus is indeed self-sustaining and complete. Personally, I am inclined to believe that there is a mystery here between the Father and the Son that has not been fully revealed to the world, and, seeing how the world is, I tend to believe there is a good reason for that...

the concept of the trinity arose from the priests within the early church with the debate over weather jesus was human or divine but a bit of both. as they were and mostly still are monotheists (heavily influenced by the work of Aristotle) they concluded that jesus was in fact god. i personaly beleive if the god of the abrahmaic religons does exist then the old testament god has changed by the new testament god and the will of god should not change as a god worthy of worship should be never changing?! anywho where one can not speak one must remain silent (Witgenstein i do beleive) i do not have any expereince of transience and thus could not possiably comment