ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

His Only Begotten Son

What do you believe is the proper definition of "the only begotten " in the scripture saying" His only begotten son".

Join Our Christian Dating and Take The Who Is Jesus Bible Quiz
 ---earl on 8/1/10
     Helpful Blog Vote (3)

Post a New Blog

Scott- I agree with you that Jesus shows 'godly fear' and 'godly devotion' to his Creator. Not that the Creator shows 'godly fear' and 'godly devotion' to Himself. 1 Tim.3:16, Heb.5:7.

Not that I wanted to get into another debate on words with Warwick, but you beat me to the post, realising that Warwick evidently does not possess a copy of the Reference Bible. So yet again, he doesn't quite know what he is talking about.
---David8318 on 8/7/10

I answered this (your) question by reposting my comments to aka.joseph on the same topic. (below)
---scott on 8/7/10

This thread will likely close before I am able to offer a real response. I'm out most of the day but will attempt to reply this afternoon...if it hasn't closed by then
---scott on 8/7/10

Warwick & Eloy believe 'GOD became manifest in the flesh', at 1 Tim.3:16? Are they able to explain why they believe this?

The original Greek uses the word 'HE' in this verse- but lets go with the trinitarian and say it's 'GOD'.

This would mean Paul taught the 'sacred secret' meant 'GOD was manifest in flesh' to show godly devotion to Himself, and then be 'raised up in glory'.

Why would God need to show 'godly devotion' to Himself? Why would God need to become flesh in order to do so? Where was AlmightyGod before being 'raised up in glory'? Who 'raised' AlmightyGod?

Such is the mysterious nature of the trinity, is why 1000's abandon the trinity doctrine every year and embrace Jehovah.
---David8318 on 8/7/10

Scott you claimed that "disciples are spoken of as being at Christ's right hand.." '

I would like to know the chapter and verse which supports this. If true this should be easy to answer.
---Warwick on 8/7/10

Jn 3:16 begotten is from the Greek "monogenes." It means, "only born."
Other meanings are available like "only child" etc.
John 1:14 is rendered "only begotten of the Father" meaning, "the sole representative of the being and character of the one who sent Him."
When used of Jesus it is also rendered in the sense of an un-originated relationship.
This means that there was no beginning of the relationship with the Father. It is not an event of time but a fact irrespective of time.
Jesus, for a period of time, laid aside His Deity to take on flesh of mankind to be their sacrifice. That is why some confuse His Deity.
Jesus is not God's only son for I am a son by adoption.
---Elder on 8/7/10

Samuel- If you believe the trinity is a 'mystery to human minds'- how do you know for sure that it is not false?

By your own admission, you cannot for sure tell me or anyone else if the mysterious trinity is Biblical truth.

You thus highlight the red-herring the trinity is. The trinity does not attempt to make anyone 'understand God'. The trinity has not been crafted for that purpose- rather the opposite.

The trinity is designed to conceal the identity of God and the reasons why Jesus was made manifest in the flesh, as my post of 8/6/10 discussed. No trinitarian has been able to answer my questions of 8/6/10 regarding 1 Tim.3:16, which doesn't discuss who God is, but who the 'sacred secret' of godly devotion became.
---David8318 on 8/7/10

scott,You stated"and trinitarians have not explained why"and asked why that christ can not/did not do this himself.
My spin-Jesus being a creator son of all the mortal races would hardly be the proper one to pass judgement upon his children he created.Like a judge in our court systems it is not good juggement that a judge sit in judgement upon one of his offspring who may chance to break a law.This case is passed onto another person who may provide just judgement for kinship is no longer a factor for deciding the lawbreaker's future.Nepitism is not acceptable for wise decisions in court.Like wise the achients of days spoken of in Daniel are those who sit in judgement over the resurections of men and women.
---earl on 8/7/10

Samuel states- 'Yes the Trinity is a mystery to human minds. So What? Are we as humans supposed to understand all about GOD?'

No, Samuel is correct in saying human minds cannot understand 'all about God'.

BUT- true Christians are supposed to understand the 'sacred secret' of godly devotion, which Jesus Christ showed to his Father and creator as Paul discussed in 1 Tim.3:16.

That Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of the 'sacred secret' of 1 Tim.3:16 is evidence after the fact. That 'sacred secret' became 'manifest' in Jesus. Not that it should remain a secret.

Thus, true Christians understand Jesus showed godly devotion to his Creator, not that the Creator showed godly devotion to Himself.
---David8318 on 8/7/10

Samuel- I do not agree with your statement that 'GOD... is the only one who can atone for our sins.' (8/6/10)

It was man who sinned in Eden, not God. Thus, the responsibility to atone (to 'cover') rests not with God, but with man.

Atonement is derived from the expression 'at one', meaning a covering of sins.

Anything making satisfaction for something that is lost or forfeited must be 'at one' with that other thing, covering it as its exact equivalent. There must be no overlapping.

Because a perfect man sinned (Adam), Jesus was made manifest as a man in the flesh to show godly devotion to his Creator. His death makes atonement for our sins. The 'last Adam' is 'at one' or covers the 'first Adam'. 1 Cor.15:45.
---David8318 on 8/7/10

What a strange question. Warwick

Strange? My question has revealed what I suspected. Your quoting from something that you don't possess.

My guess is that your "friend" is an anti JW website. EIther way, get an actual copy of the NWT Reference Bible from your "friend" and you'll find that in no way does the Ex 3:14 footnote say that "the name of God here is properly rendered into Greek as "Ego eimi."

What should have tipped to you off is this:

You do know what Jehovah's Witnesses believe that God's name is right? A clue is in this very sentence. Highlighted for your convenience.
---scott on 8/7/10

to me it means -not born of a woman- he is the only "man"thats ever been begotten
---lolita on 8/6/10

aka.joseph, (reposted)

I was paraphrasing my own comments to Warwick (8/3/10, 8/4/10) regarding Matt 20:23.

Since Christ said "No one has ascended into heaven but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man," (John 3:13 NASB) being at Christ's 'right hand,' was a future prospect. But it was a prospect according to Christ himself. (Matt 20:23)

But if there was to be a specific position for the apostles (or whomever) it was not Christ's decision to make.

The point: Warwick stated that 'sitting/standing' at the 'right hand' indicated equality. (8/3/10) Obviously not true.

And trinitarians have not explained why, if equal, this 'decision' could not be made by Christ.
---scott on 8/6/10

Scott, we understand who Jesus is via the flow of Scripture i.e. in context. A word or phrase does not have a life outside context.

We see the Son (the definite article) given identical titles as the Father-the Creator, Redeemer, the I am, the Alpha and the Omega, the God and more. As we know there are not two Alpha and Omega's, two Creators etc we understand other Scriptures in this light. In the light of Jesus who says "I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish." Who Gives eternal life? He who is the Creator, Redeemer, the Alpha and the Omega-again the definite article.

Attempting to deceive you take Scriptures out of context, thinking they bolster your case. They don't.
---Warwick on 8/6/10

"In order for the death of JESUS to be able to save all human being it took one who was both man and GOD. For no man can pay the penalty for another man." Samuel

The Son of God is no mere man. And only those Unitarians who believe that Christ didn't have a pre-human existence hold that unscriptural view. I'm not one of them. (Neither are JWs).

That said, nothing in God's word said that our redeemer and savior had to be the Almighty to save us.

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son...". John 3:16

"Thus it is written, The first man Adam became a living being, the last Adam became a life-giving spirit." 1 cor 15:45
---scott on 8/6/10

Scott, what a strange question.

I say that the 1984 large-print 'New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures with References' has a footnote on Exodus 3:14 which says the Hebrew for the name of God here is properly rendered into Greek as "Ego eimi" -- "I am."

Also that the 1985 'Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures' has "ego eimi" in the interlinear text at John 8:58, showing Jesus is one and the same Almighty God as the I AM of Exodus 3:14.

Are you saying this is untrue?

BTW a friend read my blod concerning the above texts and mailed "I have the 1984 Bible in question and it admits for Exodus 3:14 the Greek is ego eimi."
---Warwick on 8/6/10

Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Penpals

Scott again I ask:

'Scott you say that "disciples are spoken of as being at Christ's right hand.." '

Chapter and verse please.
---Warwick on 8/6/10

David, the Septuagint (Greek translation of Hebrew OT) renders God's name (Exodus 3:14) as 'ego eimi,' 'I am."

In the Greek NT Jesus calls Himself 'ego eimi,' 'I am' staking His claim as Almighty God of Exodus 3:14. See John 8:58: Jesus called Himself 'ego eimi,' 'I am.' The Jews understood His claim and attempted to "stone Him."

Curiously your NWT translation (consistent with your Kingdom Interlinnear Translation of the Greek Scriptures) renders God's name from Exodus 3:14 as 'I am'. See John 4:26, 6:35, 48,51, 8:12,24,28,58, 10:7,11,14, 11:25, 14:6, 15:1,5, and 18:5,6,8. BUT inconsistently does not translate the same word 'ego eimi' as 'I am' in John 8:58?

Obviously Jesus is uncreated Almighty God.
---Warwick on 8/6/10


It's quite clear from your comments about the NWT Ref Bible that you don't actually have a copy in your that correct?
---scott on 8/6/10

Scott, from another thread.

Your definition of 'I am' is a side issue as the Witnesses own study Bible admits Jesus was claiming to be the "I am" of Exodus 3:14, in John 8:58. Their 1984 large-print 'NWT Translation of the Holy Scriptures With References' has a footnote on Exodus 3:14 which admits the Hebrew, translated as "I am" is correctly rendered in Greek as 'ego eimi.' "I am" in the English New Testament.

The 1985 'Kingdom Interlinnear of the Greek Scriptures' reveals that Jesus' words in John 8:58 are this very same 'ego eimi', 'I am'

Therefore these two watchtower publications make clear the connection between Exodus 3:14, and John 8:58.
---Warwick on 8/6/10

Read These Insightful Articles About Accounting

David you claim Jesus is created when Colossians 1:16,17 plainly says "For by him all things were created...all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things.." He is therefore uncreated!

Further the JW 1984 large-print NWT Translation of the Holy Scriptures with References has a foot note saying the name of God in Exodus 3:14 is correctly translated as 'ego eimi' in Greek which is rendered 'I am' in your Bible in John 4:26, 6:35,48,51 and elsewhere (referring to Jesus) with the strange exception of John 8:58!

When Jesus calls Himself the 'I am' he is therefore saying He is Almighty God of Exodus 3:14.

For these two reasons how can He be a created being?
---Warwick on 8/6/10


Why God would need to show 'godly devotion' to himself is a fair question.

In addition, I wonder why God would be described as having 'Godly Fear":

"Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard for his
godly fear".
Heb 5:7 RSV, ASV, YNG

This is the same 'Godly fear' that Christians should have according to Hebrew 12:28:

"...whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear". KJV, YNG, DBY
---scott on 8/6/10

Yes the Trinity is a mystery to human minds. So What? Are we as humans supposed to understand all about GOD?

In order for the death of JESUS to be able to save all human being it took one who was both man and GOD. For no man can pay the penalty for another man.

And we have sinned against GOD so He is the only one who can atone for our sins.

JESUS is GOD that is what scripture states. The Father is GOD. I accept also that the HOLY SPIRIT being equal to JESUS is GOD.

The Bible teaches it so I believe it.
---Samuel on 8/6/10

If you are insisting that there is not a unbegotten eternal Word Son then the Trinity fails to provide the 3 that bare witness as being as one and equal, only leaving 2 that are one and the equally same, for one you insist is begotten not eternally unbegotten thus there is no oneness of 3 unbegotten but oneness of 2 in that all three must by reconing that God is eternal and Spirit is also and unbegotten so should the other 1 likewise be the same .
---earl on 8/6/10

Send a Free Funny Birthday Ecard

Jesus is the 'only begotten' as he is the sole direct creation of his Father.

The 'Son of God' became flesh & fulfilled the 'sacred secret' spoken of in 1 Tim.3:16. The 'Son of God' could thus show that a man can show perfect 'godly devotion' to his Creator, unlike the 'first Adam'. 1 Cor.15:45.

Jesus was thus, 'received up in glory', at his ascension.

Trinitarians however, say 'God was manifest in the flesh', at 1 Tim.3:16.

Why would God need to show 'godly devotion' to Himself? Why would God need to become flesh in order to do so? Where was AlmightyGod before being 'raised up in glory'? Who 'raised' AlmightyGod?

The trinity teaching turns the 'sacred secret' of godly devotion into a 'mystery'.
---David8318 on 8/6/10

Show me the unbegotten Word, for the Word dwelling inside the unbegotten Father was brought forth from the unbegotten Father as was His Spirit which now dwells in those that believe.
The Word made flesh?(ub) or the Word was made flesh?(Bible) You can decide where your allegiance lies.
---micha9344 on 8/6/10

If Mary's ovum was not fertilized by the Holy Spirit (and contrary to your misdirected responses this does inferr any sort of physical intimiacy) then the Jesus who was born from her and died on Calvary was no more than another theophony. God in the appearance of flesh. If this was all that was necessary - God to appear as flesh - then he could have come on the secne as a full grown man as he did when he appeared to Abraham - appearing as a man.
And, as I said, if it were not from Mary's own seed that Jesus was created, Gen 3:15 is a lie.
---Bruce5656 on 8/6/10

You said- that you did not say there is no(unbegotten eternal son). Is there to you a "unbegotten eternal Son"?
Your reply should tell all and clarify if you need to forgive anyone.But check your post -8-4-10-where you say-("There is no unbegotten Son").

There is no [spiritual] contradiction that the Word became flesh.I agree with John's scripture ,John did not say how it is done.
In reply,how else can the Word become flesh if not for the 3 in the Trinity in their single mindedness begat Jesus.Are not the 3 unbegotten who begat a begotten son ?
---earl on 8/5/10

Read These Insightful Articles About Fundraisers

The Word proceeded forth from God, begotten from eternity past.
Your urantia book bible is heresy by claiming the Word and the Father begot Jesus whereas the true Bible says the Word itself became flesh.
I will forgive you for putting words in my mouth for I did not say that there was 'no unbegotten eternal son' yet you choose to bait and switch words to your liking without regard to definition based on context.
If the urantia book is truth for you, so be it, let God decide on judgment day.
Your posts on other blogs show your faith in the true Word of God.
---micha9344 on 8/5/10

You said "there is no unbegotten-eternal son" who is Trinity with God and Spirit.
I have with reason showed there is and you only replied accusations.
In Trinity concepts, what ever any one says or does all 3 are as one .Thus If God sends his only begotten then the eternal-unbegotten son likewise is as one with the Father as is the spirit in this matter.And So the unbegotten Father sent his begotten as did the unbegotten Word who became flesh through the begotten Jesus.Jesus cannot be unbegotten,this status is already filled, for he is begotten.He cannot cosmologically be the unbegotten Word for the Word is unbegotten-eternal.
And is this not how the Trinity works?
---earl on 8/4/10

I see the heresy Valentinus tried to promote with the Aeons only in a different form and you bought into it.
The Word was made flesh, the eternal begotten Son.
There is no unbegotten son. You have been decieved. You are dancing around meanings and applying such out of context to fit your UB bible into the Truth. It will not work.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
'Begotten' does not apply to Jesus' birth in most instances, but has been applied to God bringing forth His Word and Jesus' resuurection.
---micha9344 on 8/4/10

micha ,I never said the Word was not made flesh.
If Jesus is begotten then he cannot be unbegotten as is the unbegotten eternal Son.
Jesus is to say the least the spiritual representation of the unbegotten Son not the cosmological representation.
This is why you may not understand the difference between the meaning of cosmological and spiritual.
Spiritually The two are one and the same as is Jesus is spiritually one and the same as his Father.You must remember that Jesus and his Father are one likewise Jesus and the eternal Son are one.Did Jesus say I and my Father are one ?Yes.So God also came here as flesh as did the eternal Son was made flesh done through a begotten son.
---earl on 8/3/10

Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce

micha,p2.You see the 3 that bear witness in heaven are all unbegotten-eternal.One is God,the other is the Son,the other is the eternal Spirit.Jesus is begotten and "God sent his only begotten son" to us in flesh to reveal his Father.Remember Jo.3.16.
Again the Trinity is all unbegottens and they are inseperatable.They do not divide to do spiritual chores.They are one and the same.So they begat a son Jesus who is begotten of them .
An unbegotten God and Son did not come to us but a begotten son did representing both.If it were not so then John would have said God sent his unbegotten Son but he did not.Do you see now?
---earl on 8/3/10

bruce5656, as I said long before, I have total liberty whether I capitalize when posting or not. I post truth, and you reply with worldly surrogacy and ovums. That is why I posted again, elaborating that the virgin was a vigin at the start of her discourse with Gabriel, and the virgin remained a virgin immediately after Gabriel left her. Her implantation of God's seed was not flesh and blood nor any physical intimacy as a man and a woman become one flesh is. God is Spirit, and Mariam became pregnant with child through God's supernatural power, by the Spirit, conceived or accepted by faith in what Gabriel said to her.
---Eloy on 8/3/10

"Born of water" refers to water baptism, not physical birth.
---Cluny on 8/3/10

Sorry for my wording, and I agree.
I did not mean to reference what Jesus said of us in, (John 3:5), but of what was said of Jesus in (1 John 5:6)
"This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ, not by water only, but by water and blood."

For us born of water (John 3:5), does mean baptism, but (1 John 5:6) is telling us that Jesus was not born in the ordinary way, only coming from the womb of woman, but that Jesus was also born with Power and that Power came from God the Father, as we are all born with inherent traits from our Fathers.

Thank you Cluny for the correction.

---David on 8/4/10

he does so through his Eternal Son, who ever has been, now is, and ever will be, the living and divine Word--urantia book
John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.-KJV
Eternal yet begotten, isn't that what you're arguing against earl?
But the UB goes farther in denying 'the Word was made flesh' into 'the Word made a son who was flesh as posted earlier. Big difference, Big heresy. Either the Word was made flesh or not, yet you will try to reconcile these 2 contradictions from the ub and the Bible. If the answers contradict the Bible, I would rather leave the answer blank, for anything against Truth is falseness.
---micha9344 on 8/3/10

Read These Insightful Articles About Jewelry

micha, can you explain what you have posted?
As you know christianity is calling Jesus both begotten and unbegotten.John did not make clarification of this now christian contradiction . By definition Jesus cannot be both begotten and unbegotten.To point out, John never stated Jesus was unbegotten.He did say the Word was made flesh, but how and by whom?.If you chance to read the exact point of reference on this situation you may find it interesting.So give it a try with your KJV.
When it fails to to clarify you on this matter then what.
---earl on 8/3/10

Bill.On "how he is".This is an exercise in cosmology.I believe everyone on this topic is very civil thus far and is having a good time exchanging their knowledge on the subject.This is not a diversion to where the importance of "how he is " is made distant from our hearts,at least I think this is the general census of the participants here.It is not only good to know things spiritual but wisdom of God's cosmology is equally important.Like the Trinity we attempt to understand it and likewise our savior we attempt to know how he functions in his domain.This is a thirst quenching exchange between believers even though we may never agree on this one particular thing.
---earl on 8/3/10

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth.-KJV
-In the same sense that God is the Universal Father, the Son is the Universal Mother
-The primary or Creator Sons are brought into being by the Universal Father and the Eternal Son
-But each Creator Son is different from every other, each is unique in nature as well as in personality, each is the " only-begotten Son " of the perfect deity ideal of his origin.
-When settled in supreme authority, they are called Master Michaels. Sometimes we refer to the sovereign of your universe of Nebadon as Christ Michael
This is the UB heresy earl promotes.
---micha9344 on 8/3/10

Earl, I am not 100% sure what you mean. However Scripture describes Jesus as God's only Son. Absloutely separate to and distinct from we humans, son's by adoption. Obviously totally sepatate from anything created, Jesus being Creator.

Maybe 'eternally begotten' is the problem as in human terms it is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. Maybe this is why the NIV and others translate 'monogenes' as 'one and only Son' as the idea of God the Son being eternal is true, and not a semantic problem.
---Warwick on 8/3/10

Read These Insightful Articles About Furniture

Warwick,I agree Jesus is one of a kind son of God.He add, not identical to any other sons of God that are "only begotten".
BUT,there is an answer to satisfy both the "eternal son" of the trinity and the "only begotten son" -begotten son of God where there shows no conflict in terms and no contradiction of definition where,
The "Word" remains unbegotten eternal as this Trinity participant is and Jesus remains as begotten by the Father.
---earl on 8/3/10

"He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God." (Revelation 19:13) Jesus Himself is the Word of God. Jesus Himself is the meaning of "the only begotten Son". And where does God's Word come from? From our Father's own heart of love and compassion. So, more than trying to get straight about "who" Jesus is, we need to find out *how* He is, by becoming like Him growing in us. Many can say He is "God", but their idea and representation of God involves a lot of judging and putting other people down so we can feel superior. But Jesus is not conceited, Jesus left Heaven itself in order to be with us and share His very own with us.
---Bill_bila5659 on 8/3/10

First of all I am glad to see you got over the the - nobody elses name other that yours and Jesus' should be capitalized - thing.
Second: "The virgin Mary remained fully clothed when she conceived." What does that have to do with what I said or the subject at hand? Nobody is suggesting that Mary got naked for the Holy Spirit to cause her to concieve.
Finaly, implantation is not conception. If a couple uses IVF to become pregnant today, the conception takes place in a testtube.
If Jesus were not of the Virgin's own seed, Gen 3:15 is a lie.
---Bruce5656 on 8/3/10

\\Jesus was born of "water and of the Spirit".
Meaning that he came from the womb as all flesh does, but he was also born of God who is Spirit.\\

"Born of water" refers to water baptism, not physical birth.
---Cluny on 8/3/10

Read These Insightful Articles About Laptops

Earl, the KJV "Only begotten" is a rendering of the Greek monogenes, meaning 'only one of its kind, unique.' The NIV renders this "the one and only Son."

As I have stated many times this Son is the Creator, Redeemer, King of Kings, the Alpha and the Omega, the I am, all terms also applied to God. Therefore Jesus is God, therefore eternal. John (1:14,18) uses monogenes to designate the relationship of eternal Sonship-the one and only Son-that Jesus has with God.

Therefore Jesus is one of a kind, God the Son, from all eternity.

Regarding Immanuel see Isaiah 7:14 and Matthew 1:23.
---Warwick on 8/3/10

The "Only Begotten Son" of God, Why does the Bible tell us this?

Jesus was born of "water and of the Spirit".
Meaning that he came from the womb as all flesh does, but he was also born of God who is Spirit.
Jesus Christ was sired by God, God was the Father of Jesus Christ.

If Jesus had been born of an Earthly Father, he would have been born of the blood of an Earthly Father, a blood that is without power.
In the Blood of Jesus, was the Power of God, a Power that was in him because he was sired by our Heavenly Father.
Without that Power being in his Blood, we could have no hope in becoming the Sons of God.
My Witness?(John 1:12-13)KJV

---David on 8/3/10

"What do you believe is the proper definition of "the only begotten " in the scripture saying" His only begotten son".
One Father brought forth solely, or exclusively, of Himself as 'The offspring'- product, result, or effect of - of Himself, i:E His Word.
Everything else in existence is a product or result of His Word, as the catalyst for the effectual operation of His Spirit.
---Josef on 8/3/10

Cluny,You stated there is no contradiction in "eternally begotten".
Lets hear it in plain english language.
The phrase is not found in the bible.
The phrase has no definition.
The phrase is cosmologically contradicting.
The phrase is not definitive.
The phrase is not a paradox because it does not exist as having a legit definition.
The phrase is assumed as truth by tradition to be something it is not.
The contradiction exists because John did not provide more cosmology with his gospel.
There is an answer to this .
---earl on 8/2/10

Read These Insightful Articles About Lawyer

Bruce5656, How dissers twist all that is said into falsehood. The virgin Mary remained fully clothed when she conceived. The virgin said to the angel, Be it done to me according to your word, and from that time the virgin conceived the seed or the Word from God.
---Eloy on 8/2/10

\\"Eternally begotten" is a contradiction\\

Paradox, yes.

Contradiction, no.
---Cluny on 8/2/10

Cluny ,true time and eternity are two different things.That is good cosmology.

BUT,unbegotten and begotten is a contradiction in terms and thats why there is no definition of "eternally begotten".It does not exist nor ever will.It has been a made up phrase for lack of understanding that does not have credibility.
---earl on 8/2/10

"Eternally begotten" is a contradiction.Find it in a dictionary??If Jesus is unbegotten-eternal-no beginnings then why is begotten used by John to describe Jesus's origin at all?

The spirit visiting Jesus's parents did not tell them to call Jesus Immanuel.They were told to call him Joshua.
General,common or traditional usage does not make it fact or truth.But traditional religionists have attempted to make it so but made a contradiction instead. John,the best theologist of the apostles,knew what he wrote because he understood the theology and cosmology .
---earl on 8/2/10

Read These Insightful Articles About Dedicated Hosting

\\Cluny,There you go again mixing unbegotten-timeless with begotten-in time\\

I'm not the one mixing them up. You are.

The phrase "Jesus is the only-begotten Son" refers to His begetting in eternity, meaning He has the same nature as the Father. (Despite what the Mutants from Kolob say.)

Time and eternity are two different things.
---Cluny on 8/2/10

Cluny,There you go again mixing unbegotten-timeless with begotten-in time.To make things work out one must remove begotten or remove unbegotten OR add one more entity to the mix where,cosmologically one is begotten and one is unbegotten.

Spiritually, I do agree the "Word" was with God and also agree Jesus was the begotten one made flesh establishing sonship with God.

Cosmologically this is not the same because one is unbegotten-a trinity being that is eternal and the other is begotten-having a beginning.These are two distinct opposing definitions and they both relate to sonship but are not the same because of origins and lack thereof.
A begotten son cannot be unbegotten and an unbegotten son cannot be begotten.
---earl on 8/2/10

Cluny,p2.You are forcing a traditional definition that Jesus is unbegotten and also begotten. Your definition cannot/does not make sense.
---earl on 8/2/10

If Jesus were "implanted" in Mary then:
- She was simply a surrogate
- Jesus was "like a man", not fully man
- Jesus was not truly her child. She would have been his adoptive mother.
- There was no conception rather an "implantation" According to one medical site: "Conception = The beginning of pregnancy, when the sperm cell from the father joins with the egg cell from the mother." A mother who is a surrogate did not "conceive"
Mary's ovum was miraculously fertilized by the Holy Spirit in an act of specific creation of the male sperm necessary for "conception" to occur.
---Bruce5656 on 8/2/10

Read These Insightful Articles About Online Marketing

Earl, the written word is easily misunderstood, worsened by cultural differences, different understanding of words and here the word limit.

In viewing Scripture's sweep we see Jesus given titles which belong to God e.g. Creator, Redeemer, Lord, I am, the Alpha and the Omega et al. Therefore He is none other than God. Therefore eternal.

When Scripture says He is begotten of God it cannot therefore mean that God has given birth to Him, but rather He is Immanuel, God with us.

Colossians 1 calls Jesus 'firstborn over all creation', i.e. uniquely preeminent in Creation being its Creator, Creator of "all things" therefore again not created, but eternal God

Eternally begotten is a convenient way to express this.
---Warwick on 8/2/10

Human nature - divine nature Cluny

Cluny may be correct in referring to this as "deep'. What he fails to mention is that there is absolutely no statement in God's word that speaks of the 'two natures of Christ'.

This is pure theological spin and Cluny has already demonstrated that he is comfortable playing both sides of 'sola scriptura'. It's acceptable to him that this christological view was developed over 100s of years during church councils...long after the inspired bible writers were gone.

And yet if other doctrines are not explicitly spelled out in scripture (the rapture for example) than he says.."How can you believe something that is not in scripture?

This is fascinating to observe.
---scott on 8/2/10

Jesus' was not from the human seed of Joseph, but instead he came straight from heaven and was implanted into the virgin Mary: "for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." Mt.1:20.
---Eloy on 8/2/10

"Only Begotten" (2)


The apostle John repeatedly describes the Lord Jesus Christ as the "only-begotten Son of God" (Joh 1:14, 3:16,18, 1Jo 4:9) using the same language that was applied to others in a parent/child relationship.

But this is not in reference to his human birth or to him as just the man Jesus. As the Logos, or Word, "this one was in the beginning with God," even "before the world was." (Joh 1:1,2, 17:5,24)

At that time while in his prehuman state of existence, he is described as the "only-begotten Son" whom his Father sent "into the world." 1Jo 4:9.

What parent did not exist before their son or daughter?
---scott on 8/2/10

Read These Insightful Articles About VoIP Service

\\Cluny, both you and Warwick are,I believe, saying that the "timeless unbegotten son" and the "in time begotten son" are one and the same eternal son.
I do not buy it.The definitions are opposing .\\

That's because you're confusing His human nature with His divine nature.

In His divinity, the Son is begotten from the timeless womb of the Father (as the Orthodox Church sings) in eternity.

In His humanity, the Eternal Son is incarnate and born in time of the Virgin Mary.

Yet these two natures are united in one and the same Person of our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ.

This is deep, but simply B-flat Christianity.
---Cluny on 8/2/10

Cluny, both you and Warwick are,I believe, saying that the "timeless unbegotten son" and the "in time begotten son" are one and the same eternal son.
I do not buy it.The definitions are opposing .
---earl on 8/2/10

"Only Begotten" (1)

The Greek word monogenes is defined by lexicographers as "single of its kind, only," or "the only member of a kin or kind." Liddell and Scotts Greek-English Lexicon, 1968, p. 1144

It describes the relationship between sons and daughters and their parents.

The Scriptures speak of "the only-begotten son" of a widow who lived in the city of Nain, of Jairus' "only-begotten daughter, and of a mans "only-begotten" son whom Jesus cured of a demon. (Lu 7:11,12, 8:41,42, 9:38.) The LXX uses monogenes when speaking of Jephthahs daughter: "Now she was absolutely the only child. Besides her he had neither son nor daughter." Jg 11:34.

---scott on 8/2/10

\\If Jesus is "begotten"-came fourth from the Father somewhere in the past then how can Jesus also occupy the title "eternal"Son being without a beginning as is the eternal Father God who is not begotten by anyone but is infinite?\\

Jesus was not begotten of the Father in the past.

He was begotten IN ETERNITY.

It is true He was incarnate and born of the Virgin in the past, but this is not the same thing.

"Past," remember, is a quality of time.
---Cluny on 8/2/10

Read These Insightful Articles About Settlements

lit.Gk: "For God he so loved the harmony, so as the Son of him, the single-sired he gave, that all in who obey him be not abandoned, but have life eternal. The obedient to him is not judged, but the not obeying already has been judged, that not obedient to the Name of the single-sired Son of God. Whom obeying to the Son has everlasting life, but whom disobeying the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains on that one." Jn.3:16,17,36.
---Eloy on 8/1/10

Eternally begotten is a confused human phrase and I do not buy into it's reality.Webster- the book which we use to define words doesn't either.Eternal is without beginning and begotten has beginnings.
I have no problem understanding that Jesus is begotten and had a beginning.That does not cheapen or degrade his superority,divinity or authority nor never will.Begotten is truth of Jesus's beginning existance but eternal-not having a beginning is not truth.Will someone try to modify Jo.3.16 and say "the only eternal begotten son"?
---earl on 8/1/10

The next question comes up when the realization is that since Jesus is begotten who/what son then inhabits eternity as the unbegotten eternal son or the "word" - as micha just spoke of in that post?
Again.We have a begotten son-Jesus and we have an unbegotten eternal son who inhabits eternity also known as the "word" and the unbegotten eternal son the word is one of the three that bear witness in heaven being as one with the other two.
---earl on 8/1/10

Micha, great answers you gave. "Only Begotten" is another title (Greek monogenes) related to the sonship of Christ as introduced in the Old Testament, but expounded in the New Testament where it is used of Christ five times (John 1:14, 18, 3:16, 18, 1 John 4:9). The thought about "Begotten" refering to Christ means that Christ is the Begotten of God in the sense that no other is. This is illustrated in the use of the same word in regard to Isaac in Heb. 11:17), who was not literally the only begotten of Abraham but was the only begotten of Abraham in the sense that he was the promised seed. It is used in the ordinary sense also in Scripture (Luke 7:12, 8:42 the only other references in the New Testament).
---MarkV. on 8/2/10

Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Services

The Word came forth from the Father.
There was never a time that the Father was not the Father, without Wisdom(Prov 8), or without His Word, either before or after His Word proceeded out from Him.
The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.
The Spirit proceeds from the Father, who is Spirit, yet the Father is not diminished in this capacity either.
The Father's Word is the Wisdom and the Power thereof.
---Micha9344 on 8/1/10

Earl, as I wrote, the Bible is God's instruction book for us, produced for us via chosen men, in human terms. Isn't it?

We all know what beget/begot (to bear, come forth) means and when applied to Christ this means, as the Creed says He is the eternally begotten one any only Son of God.

In human terms this is a contradiction but when describing our Creator, and Redeemer, the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, it is saying He comes forth from the Father, from all eternity. Therefore is God.

How can we finite beings who appear and soon depart comprehend the essense of eternal God or even eternity?
---Warwick on 8/1/10

Warwick, "of one substance (homoousios*)one and only, unique" I guess that leaves Holy Spirit out since he is neither "begotten" or "homoousios"* huh?
*homoousios a manufactured word by the Constantine crowd since no bible word defends trinity!
At Jesus' baptism God said "This is My Son in whom I am well pleased" Like "I'm well pleased with Myself"?? Oh ya!
Jesus said "I can of myself do nothing" What ,a helpless god?
You know this whole trinity thing is "trumped up" why are you defending it?
Is Holy Spirit a 2nd Son? a Brother,2nd Father ..what? You're the one saying they're all equal!
---1st_cliff on 8/1/10

If Jesus is "begotten"-came fourth from the Father somewhere in the past then how can Jesus also occupy the title "eternal"Son being without a beginning as is the eternal Father God who is not begotten by anyone but is infinite?
---earl on 8/1/10

Read These Insightful Articles About Online Stores

Scripture was given to man by God, written in our terms. "Only begotten" shows Jesus is from the Father, of one "substance" with Him, one and only, unique, therefore God the Son.

JW's say calling Jesus "Firstborn" means He was created. However Colossians 1:16,17 says He was before all "things" created every "thing", therefore cannot be created, as they claim.

As Scripture shows firstborn in context means preeminent. See Exodus 4:22 where Israel is God's "firstborn." David was called "firstborn" when he was in fact lastborn. He is being called preeminent.

As Creator, Redeemer, King of Kings, the Alpha and the Omega Jesus is God, definitely preeminent!
---Warwick on 8/1/10

Cluny, Everywhere in scripture where "beget/begot/ are used it means to "sire" or become the father different here Jesus was "begotten" by His Rev 3.14 says "the beginning of creation!
It was Constantine and his crowd that were the "real heretics" not Arius!
He was outnumbered and out gunned, easy for a mob to ostracize a few!
It's easy to side with the majority!
Remember "narrow is the gate and few there be that find it"
---1st_cliff on 8/1/10

"Begetting" implies a beginning of something. Therefore, the term "eternally begotten" is a logical absurdity.
---ger.toshav on 8/1/10

Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.