The only begotten Son

[Tri Unity]

The following are some questions related to Jesus before His incarnation:

• How is Jesus to be considered as “the only-begotten Son”?

• Was the only-begotten Son of God actually born to the father before His incarnation?

• Was this an 'event' in time?

• Did this event mark the beginning of time?

• How are we to understand this in relation to the Trinity?

Some scriptures to guide are as follows:

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son.” (John 3:16)

“When he brings in the first-begotten into the world.” (Hebrews 1:6)

“In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world.” (1 John 4:9)

 

[savedbygrace57]

How is Jesus to be considered as “the
only-begotten Son�

The Only Son that God the Father gave Being to before the world began

Was the only-begotten Son of God actually
born to the father before His incarnation?

Yes, before the Creation of the World !

Was this an 'event' in time?

No, it happened from everlasting !

How are we to understand this in relation to the Trinity?

That the only begotten Son that was born before the World began, has not reference to the Deity of the Word of God, who in Himself is Eternal and Self Existing as the Father and the Spirit, but it applies to the Mediatoral Sonship of the Son in that He was brought forth as the Head of the Election of Grace, and then joined to His Deity, the Word of God, which is God Jn 1:1

 

[Tri Unity]

That the only begotten Son that was born before the World began, has not reference to the Deity of the Word of God, who in Himself is Eternal and Self Existing as the Father and the Spirit, but it applies to the Mediatoral Sonship of the Son in that He was brought forth as the Head of the Election of Grace, and then joined to His Deity, the Word of God, which is God Jn 1:1

Thanks SBG. Do I understand that you said that the 'Son' is the only begotten of God - but the 'Word' of God is not begotten? That the 'Son' is only begotten in relationship to His mediatorial role; but outside of that role He is not God's only begotten Son? Is that correct? How would you teach this view using scripture?

 

[Randy]

I can't answer your questions regarding time.

From scripture I read Jesus as God's firstborn. Assumption not that Jesus always was but Jesus has a beginning. Before the angels, before creation but a beginning. A Son.
From scripture I read Jesus isn't God in Himself. That is the fullness was given to dwell in Him. Jesus taught the Father is in Him and in that context they are One. Assumption from the moment Jesus was that fullness was in Him. That is a Jesus apart from that fullness has never existed.

So is Jesus God?
Yes, He is all that the Father is.
No, He has always been the Son.
Jesus never dies as He lives forever by the living Father in Him.

Scripture defines the creation in the book of Genesis. It is those aspects, to me, that God created through the Son. Neither the Son nor the angels are listed in those aspects.

Assumption therefore to me is Father=>Son=>angels=>creation

From scripture the Father has no beginning and no ending. No God was formed before Him or after Him. God is good and always has been seen as good in the bible.

To me the Jesus that was (the Son) occupied that fully human body born from the virgin Mary. Again the Father was in Him in the incarnation. Jesus spoke the very words of God. The Father taught Him what to state and how to state things. So to me God came down to us through the Son. (God with us) If you have seen the Son you have seen the Father.

While Jesus was born from the Father the fullness given to dwell in Jesus wasn't. Again scripture has no beginning for God. Jesus was found worthy by God of honor power and glory as we read in the book of Rev.

Father, Son, Holy Spirit. I note the word "Son"
R.

 

[Tri Unity]

So is Jesus God? Yes, He is all that the Father is. No, He has always been the Son.

Excellent. Thanks Randy.

The main distinctions you are making is that the economic trinity is the same as the ontological trinity; whereas savedbygrace57 is stating that the 'Word' is of the ontological trinity while the 'Son' is of the economic trinity, and these two are separate and distinct trinities. I think I have that right?

 

[savedbygrace57]

tu

Do I understand that you said that the 'Son' is the only begotten of God

Yes but not in Deity, but as Mediator and Head of the Church !

- but the 'Word' of God is not begotten?

Correct, unless you can show me a verse that speaks of the only begotten Word. The Word was GodJn 1:1 unless you believe God was begotten !

That the 'Son' is only begotten in relationship to His mediatorial role; but
outside of that role He is not God's only begotten Son?

Correct, outside that role He is God, the Word was God Jn 1:1 Deity is not begotten !

Is that correct? How would you teach this view using scripture?

I have done that already

http://www.christianforums.net/showthread.php?t=28344&highlight

Now how can you refute this view using scripture ? Remember, if you believe that the Son was begotten as God, then you fall into the heresy of a begotten God concept. and if you deny the Deity of Christ altogether, you fall into another heresy. So please explain your postition and why you started this thread, what is your motive ? Thanks !

 

[Free]

How is Jesus to be considered as “the only-begotten Son�

As the "one and only" or "unique" or "one a kind," which is approximately the primary meaning of monogenes. We certainly cannot think that there was a time the Son did not exist, a time when he was created.

Was the only-begotten Son of God actually born to the father before His incarnation?

I do not think 'born' is the right word, since he has always existed for eternity past.

Was this an 'event' in time?

No.

Did this event mark the beginning of time?

No.

How are we to understand this in relation to the Trinity?

He is the eternally begotten of the Father.

 

[Knotical]

To get an understanding you can start with the nicene creed:

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
​

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.
​

Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.
​

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.
​

And I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
​

​

Begotten means to "Proceed from."

Jesus is the Word - John 1:1, which also states that Jesus was there at the beginning.

Time is a man-made concept to help us understand why things change and put our own control and measurement on events. God, and Jesus exist outside of it as they are eternal. They have always existed.

 

[Tri Unity]

Now how can you refute this view using scripture? Remember, if you believe that the Son was begotten as God, then you fall into the heresy of a begotten God concept. and if you deny the Deity of Christ altogether, you fall into another heresy. So please explain your postition and why you started this thread, what is your motive ? Thanks !

I don't think these questions have ever been fully answered by the church. It seems that no matter which way you answer you fall into some type of heresy or error. Your position, for instance, suggests that there are two trinities: one which is eternal and one which is temporary. I don't think your position here can be justified by scripture or tradition. The earliest councils would have regarded you as heretical.

I think Randy is closer in accuracy. I don't think there are two different trinities, just one. I don't think Jesus (the I Am) and the Word are two seperate people or essences.

Thanks

 

[Tri Unity]

To get an understanding you can start with the nicene creed: Begotten means to "Proceed from."

"Begotten" does not mean "proceed from". Notice in the Nicene Creed that the word "proceeds from" is used only of the Holy Spirit: "who proceeds from the Father and the Son." Would you imagine the word "proceeds from" in interchangeable with "begotten"; that the Holy Spirit was begotten from the Father and the Son? The early church was very careful not to confuse this idea as though the Holy Spirit was another Son through the divine union of the Father and Son: another "uniquely-begotten" child of God.

No, the word "begotten" does not mean "proceed from".

 

[Knotical]

"Begotten" does not mean "proceed from". Notice in the Nicene Creed that the word "proceeds from" is used only of the Holy Spirit: "who proceeds from the Father and the Son." Would you imagine the word "proceeds from" in interchangeable with "begotten"; that the Holy Spirit was begotten from the Father and the Son? The early church was very careful not to confuse this idea as though the Holy Spirit was another Son through the divine union of the Father and Son: another "uniquely-begotten" child of God.

No, the word "begotten" does not mean "proceed from".

Actually, it is correct as both the Son and the Holy Spirit proceed from God.

 

[Tri Unity]

Actually, it is correct as both the Son and the Holy Spirit proceed from God.

Yes, they both "proceed from" God - but you have stated that "proceed from" and "begotten" mean the same thing. They do not. Where is 'begotten' used in this sense in scripture? Show me your evidence for such a claim.

 

[Free]

To get an understanding you can start with the nicene creed:
Begotten means to "Proceed from."

As I have stated, there is more than one meaning behind the word "begotten." This is the problem with sticking to only the English word "begotten" which was chosen by translators, instead of the looking at the Greek word monogenes behind it.

Personally, I don't have a problem with understanding "begotten" as conveying the idea of "proceeding from" as it relates to the Father and Son relationship, but I do not think they can necessarily be equated.

 

[Carys]

http://www.gotquestions.org/only-begotten-son.html

 

[Tri Unity]

http://www.gotquestions.org/only-begotten-son.html

Some good points in the article...

"The phrase "only begotten" translates the Greek word monogenes. This word is variously translated into English as "only," "one and only," and "only begotten." "

"So what does monogenes mean? According to the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BAGD, 3rd Edition), monogenes has two primary definitions. The first definition is "pertaining to being the only one of its kind within a specific relationship." This is the meaning attached to its use in Hebrews 11:17 when the writer refers to Isaac as Abraham's "only begotten son." Abraham had more than one son, but Isaac was the only son he had by Sarah and the only son of the covenant."

"The second definition is "pertaining to being the only one of its kind or class, unique in kind." This is the meaning that is implied in John 3:16. In fact, John is the only New Testament writer who uses this word in reference to Jesus (see John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). John was primarily concerned with demonstrating that Jesus was the Son of God (John 20:31), and he uses this word to highlight Jesus as uniquely God's Son—sharing the same divine nature as God—as opposed to believers who are God's sons and daughters through faith."
​

This shows the usage of the term is related to the sonship of Christ; it had nothing to do with the role of Christ as mediator or of "proceeding" from the father, as an angel proceeds on a mission. Christ is not the son simply for a role-playing game of redemption - Christ is eternally the only begotten Son.

 

[savedbygrace57]

triu

I don't think these questions have ever been fully answered by the
church.

What say you ?

Your position, for instance, suggests that there are two trinities:

Explain, in addition to what you think above !

.

I don't think your position here can be justified by scripture or tradition.

I challenge you to disprove it by scripture.

 

[Free]

I challenge you to disprove it by scripture.

Jesus always existed as deity and didn't become a man until the virgin birth. That is what the Bible plainly teaches:

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.
.....
Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (ESV)

Here the Greek word egeneto, used for "became" in verse 14, is the same word translated as "made" in verse 3. It means that Jesus assumed the entirety of human nature, not just a human body.


Php 2:5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,
Php 2:6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Php 2:7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
Php 2:8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. (ESV)

Note the progression: "he was in the form of God...but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men." He had been in "the form of God" but "made himself nothing" in order to take "the form of a servant," to be "born in the likeness of men."

It cannot get any clearer than that.

 

[savedbygrace57]

free

Jesus always existed as deity

I have stated that already !

and didn't become a man until the virgin birth

Please provide us with a scripture that states that Jesus did not become a man until the virgin birth !

Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we
have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and
truth. (ESV)

This states that the Word became flesh, not that the Word became a Man.

To say that one needs to exist in the flesh and blood to be a man, you must prove from scripture. Paul spoke of an experience of a man, but was not sure whether the experience was in the flesh 2 Cor 12:2

2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

So you have not disproved anything !

 

[Free]

Please provide us with a scripture that states that Jesus did not become a man until the virgin birth !

It's made abundantly clear in those two passages you didn't address.

 

[savedbygrace57]

It's made abundantly clear in those two passages you didn't address.

Reread my comments !