What does "Only Begotten Son Of God" really mean? Interview with Dr. Charles Lee Irons

Is Jesus the "One and only son of God?" or Is Jesus the "Only begotten son of God?" Since the beginning of the 20th century, there has been great debate over the translation of this Greek word. Listen to this podcast to hear Michael Rowntree, Josh Lewis and special guest Dr. Irons discuss not only the translation of this word but the doctrine of eternal generation of the Son.
Donate (Paypal)
www.paypal.com...
___________________________________________________________________________________
Exclusive Content (Patreon)
/ theremnantradio
___________________________________________________________________________________
Michael Rowntree's Church Bridgeway
www.bridgewayc...
___________________________________________________________________________________
Michael Miller's Church Reclamation Church
reclamationden...
___________________________________________________________________________________
Kairos Classroom: Use Promo Code Remnant for 10% off
kairosclassroo...
__________________________________________________________________________________
Remnant News Letter
eepurl.com/hSCQRv
__________________________________________________________________________________
Free Mini E-course
remnant-univer...

[@annaboshier6680]

Thanks for your closing remark Michael. Church father stuff didn’t used to interest me at all when you first started doing the church father history shows but praise God it really interests me now! Because I see how it’s so important - through your show! Thanks team

[@wikilee8928]

For us yes, we cannot earn our sonship. Grace is a free gift as long as we confess Christ as the Lord. However, for Christ, He also brought His humanity into divinity. When Jesus Christ was walking on earth, He had a human body just like ours, and human body is corruptible. When Jesus Christ resurrected, His body became incorruptible, otherwise known as the glorified body. When we die, our body is corrupted. It won't be incorruptible until the second coming of Christ. They are two different scenarios.

[@jotink1]

Grateful for Dr Irons and why eternal generation of the son is important to Trinitarian theology and to see a continuity with how monogenes has been understood from earliest times.

[@dustinneely]

I apologize for my ill-mannered comment. Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner.

[@joshuagarza0623]

Could you guys see if Daniel Wallace would come on to argue the counterpoint to this discussion? His translator note in the NET Bible where monogenes appears is helpful.

[@mariakarlson7537]

I’m totally fine with mystery. And this is definitely a mystery

[@heckter1473]

María don’t settle for mystery. God is not a mystery. Jesus was born of the Father. The Father gave Jesus his son authority over all creation. The Father created everything through his son Jesus. So salvation is for all who believe in the Father and his son Jesus Christ.

[@DesiFR25]

Thank you for sharing this incredible conversation with all of us. I love this topic! God created the world, revealed himself as a man died for our sin and resurrected .God made it understandable for our little minds to understand. However, we will never fully comprehend GOD, the moment we fully comprehend is the moment he's no longer a GOD. You cant put GOD in a box or your back pocket. God is All powerful, mysterious, mighty, all knowing. God can be 10 persons and is 1 GOD, yes our brains will hurt thinking about his power and mystery. Bless you all. Father please open our minds and hearts to understand you better and to share your power and love with all humanity in Jesus name 🙏

[@ws775]

He that hath seen me hath seen the father. John 14;9

[@graphguy]

Another question that is self evident.

[@coreyohaire2655]

Dr Mike Heiser dealt with that nicely and I believe that in the context of the entire narrative of scripture as a whole it means unique. Son of god vs sons of god he’s unique because he is god and not created.

[@coreyohaire2655]

One of a Kind

[@coreyohaire2655]

There are no others like him

[@coreyohaire2655]

Also issac is unique among Abraham’s offspring Ishmael is the first born so it’s not his only son

[@andrewmattiewalter]

I've got Heiser in my head too, the very fact that he's referred to in the singular "Son" vs the plural "sons" is the most important part. It's not that hard. You can totally believe in the eternality of Jesus with that belief you don't have to divorce those ideas.

[@Bioboy590]

Literally none of the verses he mentioned referenced "begottenness" in eternity past. If John wanted to make that point, it would've been in John 1 when he described the Word's relationship with God in eternity past. As for the Nicene Creed, it is demonstrably fallacious to say it was universally accepted. The creed was created under Constantine's instruction to avoid Arius's teachings from separating his empire through a church split, and he informed any bishops that did not accept the Creed that they would be excommunicated and exiled, so it was hardly an unbiased council. I reject both Arianism (Jesus is created) and the Nicene Creed (Jesus was begotten from the Father before all ages). Rather, I hold what I can clearly find in Scripture: that the Word is a coequal and coeternal third of the Godhead, humbled himself to become begotten of God in human form as the Son, and has since been exalted and glorified as the Name above any other name. Hebrews 2 clarifies that Christ's humanity is what allows Him to call us brothers. Without His humanity, Jesus would not be a Son of God.

[@jotink1]

I appreciate your thoughtful reply but Jesus is a Son of God because God is his Father. You can't be a son without a Father and you can't be called a father without a son or those words loose all meaning. Both God and Jesus are eternal and therefore eternal generation makes sense of that timeless begetting.

[@ravikeller9626]

As another commenter said, does that mean that you don’t believe the Father was the Father prior to about 2,000 years ago? And was the Spirit still the Spirit? If not, how exactly would you distinguish between the three Persons of the Trinity?

[@coryc1904]

One cannot "become begotten". You either are or you aren't. It's not something you can become. Also if the second person of the Trinity is the Word instead of the Son, then who is the first person of the Trinity? If Jesus wasn't always a son then the Father wasn't always a Father. So who was He before He was God The Father?

[@annaboshier6680]

I see it that christianity HAS to engage THE MOST BRILLIANT mind.. it has to be this technical and intelligent and crazy intricate because we are dealing with GOD the creator of all things including those people who have brilliant minds. I am grateful for the brilliant minds that interpret these things for us more simple minds and grateful the gospel is also simple enough for those who aren’t so brilliant.

[@Elroi3310]

Eternally begotten ? Don’t begotten mean brought into existence?

[@michaelhaigh9182]

Yes Jesus is the same yesterday that ov means not eternal and today and for ever that means he has not all ways excited just like Hebrews 1 v 4 he’s a copy of his farther a copy is all ways a copy it never means he was he the same age of Jehovah as he’s immortal means Jehovah can never die Jesus did

[@elibiro2290]

The issue I see with "begotten" in a modern translation is that the Bible is the only place you will encounter the word. I have never seen "begotten" in any context other than the Bible or a discussion on the Bible so I have to translate it in my head. Even after that whole interview I don't see that there is any difference between begotten and unique.

[@Scott48-w9i]

Begotten at the resurrection

[@davidrose3737]

Yeah but begotten is not in Greek? It's monogene, meaning offspring and unique, only one of its kind or Special!!!!

[@dustinneely]

You didn't even watch it did you?

[@sharonlouise9759]

I thought this was very interesting. However, my use of the word "unique" will not change. In the case of Abraham, he offered up his one and only unique son to God. Abraham had Ishamael prior, but Isaac was his only unique son because he was the son of promise. None of his other children where children of promise. Thanks as always for great content.

[@folktheologytransition3756]

I agree here, but what’s your take on 1 John 5:18?

[@sharonlouise9759]

@@folktheologytransition3756the word there isn't the same as John 3:16 which is monogene. I haven't done a thorough study of 1 John 5:18, so I have no comment on it. Thanks

[@folktheologytransition3756]

@@sharonlouise9759 Appreciate that I’ll look into this further Blessings 🙏🏾

[@nadzach]

I don't know how rare is the gift of visions. But one thing that separates from any sort of delusion is that the vision maybe long, but at the end, no time has passed. Someone may be speaking at the time. It doesn't matter if they are in the middle of a word. One second you are in your seat at church. The next thing you know, you're in another place or even another time. Then you're back in your seat at the same time you left. There doesn't seem to be time in the God dimension. Just another fact I can't explain.

[@BlueWambat]

In all of the passages shared, I don't see how a single one can't simply be referring to the conception/birth of Jesus as the God-man. I didn't hear any language that sounded like eternal begottenness. In every case, "begotten" was being used in the past tense, not in an ongoing or eternal sense. So I am genuinely wondering: have I missed something? I don't have any theological qualms with Jesus being eternally begotten, I'm just not seeing it in the scripture. Every one I've looked at could just as simply be referring to the incarnation.

[@BlueWambat]

Also the Nicene Creed says "Begotten" not "Eternally Begotten" - unless I'm reading the wrong one?

[@jeremy144713]

Yeah I agree with you. I’m fine with this, I just don’t see it either

[@jesusislord3260]

Thats a lot of complication! Is eternally begotten not an oxymoron? When was Jesus GRANTED to have life in himself? Granted would be a point in time. It's all so much simpler than that to understand 'only begotten'.

[@lindarizzo71]

Man always has to complicate the things of God

[@malpercio123]

Proverbs 8:28 describes the eternal begetting of the Word of the Lord from eternity.

[@jesusislord3260]

@Kyle Sailer in Proverb 8, Wisdom, which is God's word, was 'possessed' by God from eternity, but 'brought forth' before heaven and earth. Then He says that He was 'with' God by the time the foundations (rocks) of the earth were formed.

[@UtahKent]

The whole idea of "begotten" being a transition of any sort is t he reason trinitarian scholars must argue "gennes" indicates "unique" rather than "preceeding from" in any fashion. Yet, the person Jesus is described as The Son in relation to the Father. This is clearly a description of a contingent or subordinate relationship. So also is any language of granting or emanating. And what about the Holy Spirit? Whether it proceeds from the Father and the Son or only the Father, he is also in a contingent position. Unless of course you simply demand we ignore a consistent use of words and a consistent use of their meaning in a certain context. If that is the case, anything can mean anything, which means it means nothing. When meanings become transitory, they lose their value.

[@brianakortbein5082]

Why did you got back to the old intro? Issues with the sound when the bass hit with the new one?

[@jesusrevival-ministriessan3016]

Because the Begetter is eternally existent, so also is His Son- “having neither beginning of days nor end of life.” The fallacy of thinking "son" must have a beginning in time, would also require that the "Father" must likewise have a beginning in time since all fathers are sons to someone else. This also changes the subject then, to the 'eternal Fatherhood' of God as an issue, which is likewise impossible unless He had an eternal son! This shows the illogical reasoning and absurdity of their arguments and objections. If there was a time when there was NOT a "son", then the Father was not always a "father." For these heretics to say that their reasoning clears up the "eternal" begottenness of the Son only further confuses the issue, and does NOT simplify it. Also, when Paul defended the resurrection of Christ in the book of Acts, by quoting from the Psalms, "You are My Son, this day have I begotten You" to simply say that he was defending Christ's sonship ignores the fact of "resurrection" since simply being God's Son doesn't have anything to do with "resurrection" which Paul was defending to the Jews from the scriptures. Jesus was actually re-born out of death, and re-born meaning re-entering the world again "alive" and in a different condition than what He became on the cross, where He was "made to be sin for us" as Paul said- He came out of the tomb ALIVE again, but NOT with our sins, our curse, or our fallen condition as He put all of the fallen conditions of the 'first Adam' away forever. If Jesus had not been re-born, or re-begotten into His FIRST position as God's SON, with the glory which He had with HIM FROM BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD, then we could not be born again with His DIVINE nature, as every human son receives when birthed by a human parent. As far as the discussion on John's reference to the Father "granting the Son to have Life in Himself" he is referring to Christ's HUMANITY at the time, not in reference to His deity, since Jesus emptied Himself of His privileges of deity as a "man" and therefore depended on Hs Father to "grant" Him, as a man, to "give birth' (life) to all His "seed" who are born of Him. As the NEW ADAM of a NEW HUMANITY or RACE of divine people, Jesus births us into a new reality and gives us new life. There must be the context of His willing limitations as a "man" in His incarnation, and NOT in relation to His pre-humanity as God. Those who, as John wrote DON"T HAVE THE "UNCTION FROM THE HOLY ONE" will never be able to see TRUTH, regardless of disputes over 'words' and 'terminologies' since they are willingly blind to any exegesis of the TRUTH. This why we need the Spirit of TRUTH which Christ sent to all who believe on the SON of God. The divine terms of 'Father and Son' are eternal realties, and thus precede our limitations of fatherhood and sonship 'in time.' Trying to insist that an "eternal" father and an "eternal" son is an invention of men, is actually BACKWARDS reasoning. First was the ETERNAL, after which we base our father-son relationships which are confined to the restrictions of time, having beginnings and endings. The ETERNAL came first, not the temporal, as with God and His Son, and neither had a beginning as existing outside of time. (To claim that monogenes means "ONLY" son, denies the fact that the angels too are “sons of God’ (i.e. by creation, NOT by birth). That fact automatically contradicts their assertion, and so cannot be the true translation. Thus, Jesus IS, in fact, God’s only BEGOTTEN SON!

[@brendaboykin3281]

Thank you, Gentlemen 🌹🌹🌹

[@dashaunjefferies1168]

did the Jews of the day see the title of "Son of God" as a claim to being deity/YHWH? I'm trying to understand the blasphemy/stoning/killing claims. Was Son of God different than God to them,? If so, in what way?

[@DavidRudat]

Consider just maybe a shadow came upon Mary and who might have been in that shadow, or cloud. Maybe the same one who was in the cloud came upon her and that shadow who came upon her was actually the Lord God penetrating her. He who is totally God,j Jehova Elohim, by the power in his presence, in the shadow, seeded her. Remember what the shadow of Peter did to those upon whom his shadow fell. And "thing" in her is the word Rhema, changing him from LOGOS to RHEMA after his baptism which is a game changer

[@arxierus]

You all espouse Augustinian Roman Catholicism. The term exerchomai refers to something or someone from within coming forth from the Being hosting that which comes forth. The Son before becoming the Son was within the Father commonly referred to as Logos. At a time in eternity past beyond our human comprehension exerchomai took place and the Logos became the Son. Arius did not teach that the Son was created as is errouneously taught by hyper trinitarians who under Constantine won the human contest at the counsel o Nice.....the victors always frame the history to express their conclusions even if erroneously derived. The true meaning of monogenes is simply that the Son was uniquely (mono) one of a kind)) generated (exerchomai) at a definite point in eternity past beyond our human ability to comprehend. Trintarians profess co-equal everything regarding the concocted three in one god. Why did Messiah say that Hs Father was greater than Himself on numerous occasions? Do you believe Father and Son are merely anthropomorphic metaphors rather than absolute and very real titles? I believe sincerely that the Son is equal WITH His Father BY INHERITANCE (Hebrews 1) but not equal TO His Father. The concept of trinity cannot be fairly supported via sola scriptura....it is purely a human assumption based on human conjecture. I believe in One Eloah the Father and His literally begotten Son Who He sent.......which is the manifestation of eternal life (please read John 17:1-3) Shalom

[@annaboshier6680]

Further to that.. what are your recommendations on where to start on reading the church fathers??

[@ws775]

Polycarp, Ignatius, Clement, Noetus, Praxeas, Sabellius and Beryllus.

[@palermotrapani9067]

Saint Polycarp, Ignatius of Antioch and Saint Clement of Rome are all considered Apostolic Fathers and orthodox in Doctrine from the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox perspective (14 autocephalous Churches in spiritual communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople), and I would add both the Oriental Orthodox (Coptics in Egypt, Ethiopian Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox) as well as the Assyrian Church of the East. Another orthodox Church Father of the 2nd century would be Saint Irenaus of Lyons. Tertullian's Trinitarian writings on the Trinity are orthodox and he was in full communion with the Church till around 210 when he disagreed with lenient penance practices for individuals who had denied being Christian when Roman Government were persecuting the early Church. Some of those reconciled and came back to the Church and Tertullian disagreed with those practices and he actually got mixed up with the Montanist movement. Sill his works I would say Pre 210 AD are doctrinally sound. On the other hand, Noetus and Sabellius are modalist and there doctrines are not orthodox (oneness). Berylus of Bostra would be an early Arian in belief (did not believe in the pre-existence of Christ). Praxeaus was another modalist.

[@micheleriley4514]

My understanding of only Begotten SON of GOD means born without the sin nature of man. John 10:30 JESUS says I and my FATHER are ONE. How can they be separate from one another? Please explain. Thank you.

[@dorothypoole8908]

In Genesis is always says God created. What does the word "only" mean? The Father always precedes the Son in nature. John 20:17 Jesus calls God his God, and his Father.

[@contraheresy]

Strongly disagree with this guest. The Nicene creed states “we believe in one God, the father” i.e. the monarchia of the father. Also, it states the son is “true god from true god” i.e. the Son is caused but fully divine. Being caused by the Father does not mean the Son was created or less than divine because as Athanasius taught the Son is eternally from the Fathers nature (homoousia) which is why he is called the Son whereas creation happens within time according to the Fathers will. An Essence/energy distinction which avoids the eternal creation problem of absolute divine simplicity. Furthermore, Gregory of Nyssa teaches that the Father’s aseity is not proper to his essence but is proper to his relation to the Son/Spirit. He uses the example of Adam possessing the same nature as us but being unbegotten. Lastly, it was the Cappadocian model that was accepted at the second ecumenical counsel not the Augustinian model. And the teachings of Calvin and reformers after him have led so many to leave the faith because it’s either utterly incoherent or just straight tritheism.

[@paulpaul-n]

I miss dr Michael Heiser

[@lindararey8641]

I'm not buying the idea that "unique" son necessarily takes away from the essence of the Nicene Creed, which I hold to, firmly. But good conversation! (Also, Grudem's doctrine of the eternal subordination of the Son needed to be slapped down, so good on Dr. Irons!)

[@keithwilson9172]

Who cares about a creed

[@runee60]

Apparently there was a slight bit of confusion in the initial translation. The scrolls found later actually translated in to the meaning of unique. One of a kind.

[@VernonHowe-rs1lt]

Christ is begotten, not created. ( John 3: 16.) ( Meaning Jesus was Made, or one can say Formed.) This is taking the Mind back to Eternity and Ages past.) "for 'God so Loved the world, that he gave his only - begotten Son, - not a son by creation, as were the angels, nor a son by adoption, as is the forgiven sinner, but a Son begotten in the Express image of the Father's Person." "The Eternal Father, the unchangeable one, gave his only begotten, Tore from his Bosom Him who was made in the Express image of his person, sent him down to earth to reveal how greatly he Loved mankind." ( All things derived from God The Father, Jesus Christ came out of the Father's Bosom, so as the Living Father has Life in Himself, He has given the Son to have Life in Himself.) And that will make Jesus Christ Self - Existent and Co- Eternal, because he came from the Source of Life. "He was Begotten, not created. He is of the Substance of the Father, so that in his Very Nature he is God; and since this is so 'it pleased the Father that in him should all Fulness dwell." Col. 1: 19... While both are of the Same Nature, The Father is First in Point of Time. He is also Greater in that he had no beginning, While Christ's Personality had a beginning." The Father is a Personal Being, The Son is a Personal Being, but the Holy Ghost is the Same as the Holy Spirit. It is a Divine Influence Emanating (proceeding.) From The Father and The Son. "Neither are the Father and the Son parts of the 'three - one God." "They are two distinct beinngs, yet one in the design and accomplishment of redemption." Hebrews 1: 8, 9. John 1: 1. John. 17: 8. John. 8: 42. From Eternity there was a complete unity between the Father and the Son. They were two, yet little short of being identical; two in individuality, yet one in Spirit, and Heart, and Character. If not revealed by the Holy Spirit of God, it will not be fully understood or grasped. God Bless.🧠🙏

[@ThinkingAboutJesus]

Wait, is this guy saying that we should conform the scripture to the creeds rather than conforming the creeds to the Bible? The creeds are statements of theology that were made much later and are not authoritative or scriptures. You have elevated creeds above scripture. This sounds dangerous and heretical. The creed was written in Greek and says monogena. This same word as the scriptures. You can use it as a source for your definition. Also Ishmael was begotten but Issac was unique. All of the arguments presented here are logically incorrect. Begotten makes Jesus less than eternal and diminishes his diety. This it the sort of thinking done by people like Bart Ehrman am leads skeptics rejecting Christ because they say if he was begotten then he is not eternal and if not eternal then not God. Very dangerous.

[@americanlostinvietnam3721]

This is the way I have always believed it to be just by reading the bible. This idea that Jesus is the Father is false. The idea that Jesus is equal to the Father is false. Isaiah saw a pre-incarnate Christ and He was already glorified in His eternal position within the Godhead because He was eternally appointed to be the one who comes and is made a sacrifice from whom all men were to be saved. He is begotten without question and this distinguishes him from all other sons of God who were created into divinity. This son, was not created, but He was begotten and appointed by the Father within the Godhead, eternally glorified.

[@ws775]

Then why did Jesus say he that hath seen me hath seem the father?

[@americanlostinvietnam3721]

@@ws775 Because Jesus is the representative for the Father. He is the messenger for the Father because if any man heard the actual Father they would die. If any man saw the Father, they would die. That is why scripture constantly tells you, that no man has seen nor heard the Father. That's why the Father must use messengers. Notice the prophets always say something like "the word of the Lord came to me" It is being delivered via messenger. When Moses asked to see God's face, God told him that he can't, but he will cause his glory to pass by him. Moses saw Jesus, the glory of God pass by.

[@stanreed9277]

Why do you believe that Jesus was not equal to God the Father? John 5:18 Bible Gateway Expanded Bible. If Jesus didn't consider himself coequal to God, then why didn't he correct the Jews by telling them that they misunderstood what he meant? How do interpret what Paul wrote in Philippians 2:6? Who being in nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage. Let Christ himself be your example example as to what your attitude should be. For he had always been God by nature, did not cling to his prerogatives as God's equal, but stripped himself of all privilege by consenting to be a slave by nature and being born as a mortal man And having become a man, he humbled himself by living a life of utter obidience even to the extent of dying, and the death he died was the death of a common criminal. This is why God has lifted him so high and has given him the name beyond all names, so that at the name of Jesus "every knee shall bow" whether in Heaven or earth 🌍 or under the earth . And that is why at the end, every tongue will confess that "Jesus Christ is the Lord" to the glory of God the Father! Bible Gateway J.B. Phillips New Testament.

[@americanlostinvietnam3721]

@@stanreed9277John 14:28 - for the Father is greater than I. How is that equal? Who was it that sent Christ to die for man? Who was it that raised Jesus from the dead? Jesus did not raise himself. The Father uses a messenger because people have a tendency to drop dead when they hear his voice or see his face. Who is the messenger and word of the Father? Jesus never claimed to be equal with the Father. He did claim to be the Son of the Father and he did claim to be God. However the H.Spirit is also God and He is not equal with the Son.

[@robertrodrigues7319]

I disagree 100%. God bless you all.

[@nkrumahedwards1411]

No matter how you punt Begotten into the eternal past, it does not unbegotten Jesus, therefore eliminating His ever existence! I accept the truth that Jesus blood cleanses all sins, He is the only way to God, as God SOVEREIGNTLY DESIGNED! But your self defeating method of conveying God's infallible word is incoherent and incorrect! There is One God, He has a Spirit and Son your explanation of this infallible truth is so off!

[@briendoyle4680]

Hahaha... such a silly fable!!

[@upclosepersonal]

It was eternally begotten God. God beget God the nature of God, the omni presence of God, the visible image of the invisible father, who is the father, God, not a begotten godson. Before time only begon's son-in scripture is at his birth. The father is the son The son was the word the nature of God, the father before he took on flesh and became the Son of God, but it's just a father. Jesus comes in for his father's name. He is his father. The holy comfort of his jesus, their all father jesus just one god the father

[@andrewmattiewalter]

I've got Heiser in my head on this one, the very fact that he's referred to in the singular "Son" vs the plural "sons" is the most important part. It's not that hard. You can totally believe in the eternality of Jesus with that belief you don't have to divorce those ideas.

[@upclosepersonal]

It was eternally begotten God. God beget God the nature of God, the omni presence of God, the visible image of the invisible father, who is the father, God, not a begotten godson. Before time only begon's son-in scripture is at his birth. The father is the son The son was the word the nature of God, the father before he took on flesh and became the Son of God, but it's just a father. Jesus comes in for his father's name. He is his father. The holy comfort of his jesus, their all father jesus just one god the father

[@jesusislord3260]

Issac is the only son to Abraham according to the law of his land. The child of a servant woman is classed as the woman's son under their law. The father (master) had to declare the son to be a son in public. He had to say in front of witnesses 'you are my son' for the son to be a rightful son and heir to the fathers estate. Did the sons of the slave masters in America to the slave woman become heirs of those masters estate? No, they were slaves themselves because they were classed as the slave woman's child.

[@approvedofGod]

So how did the preexistent Son come into Mary at her conception? Can you explain how Luke did not allude to an eternal Son coming into the womb of Mary?

[@folktheologytransition3756]

Great conversation. My contention however is that John 5:26, contextually speaking, was alluding to “resurrection” & “judgement”, not that of the Father bestowing life (generation) to the Son. From verses 19-32 Jesus was talking about “dual works” - what the Father does, the Son does, the Father raises the dead, the Son does it too. The Father has “life in himself” (pertaining to resurrection) so he has given to the Son to have “life in himself” (resurrection), and given him (the Son) authority to execute “judgment”. (Brackets are my own insertion for clarity) The verses preceding, and subsequent to verse 26, speaks of the Father and Son’s dual work regarding resurrection (with the exception of the Father judging no one but giving that right to the Son). Conclusion, verse 26 is about “resurrection” not the Son deriving life, or being generated from the Father. Great talk though!

[@DesiFR25]

Abraham offered Issac his begotten, only son, however, Isaac wasn't his only Son. Issac was the Son of the promise. Through Isaac the 12 tribes of Israel would come through him, he was yhe son of the promise. Jesus was the only begotten Son, Jesus was the promise from the beginning the only one promised that can save us of our sin, only his blood could cleanse us of our sin. We cant find salvation in no-one else, Jesus is God in the flesh.

[@nkrumahedwards1411]

Begotten or Born differentiation is really your claim to accurate interpretation! May the True God you wisdom!

[@saltzine]

:: if im not mistaken, the main point is the jewish/ bible times importance of “heir” :: at least it was mentioned here

[@lindarizzo71]

Well it's not complicated fellas, He's God only begotten Son, He was not born of man, but by the Holy spirit of the Father, God borne Himself through a virgin and took on human form, no one else was created in that way, therefore makes Jesus Christ God's only begotten Son!

[@jt-ff3yx]

Yes, not complicated at all....

[@ws775]

That made him also the son of the Holy Spirit who is God. God is a spirit, the father. And then he claimed to be the Holy Spirit and the father when he said he would not leave them as orphans but would come again to them. In fact he said he and the father would come and make their abode with them. It’s all in him, the fullness of the Godhead. Jesus is the father, the son, and the Holy Ghost

[@sharonsmith1505]

That's about it😊

[@Triplea103]

​@@ws775the last part doesn't agree with the doctrine of the trinity. Jesus isn't the father or the holy spirit.

[@emiliegottfridson6887]

I agree! I find that the concept of Jesus being eternally begotten to be read into the scriptures, including the notion of the Father being the only one with aseity but that the second person of the Trinity and the Holy Spirit somehow would derive their existence from Him... I think it's quite clear that all three persons of the Trinity have aseity (as God) and are co-eternal...whereas the concept of 'only begotten son' is tied to the incarnation of the second person of the trinity... My thoughts 😊

[@jesusislord3260]

Begotten means fathered, only begotten means only one fathered. Simples. There's a reason why Jesus is called God's seed.

[@Bioboy590]

Exactly. He created Adam, but fathered/begot Jesus in human form.

[@AstariahJW]

Eternal begotten doesn't even make sense

[@wikilee8928]

Human beings were created by God as opposed to Jesus Christ was borne of God. Jesus Christ has dual nature, divinity and humanity. Jesus Christ's divinity exists eternally, however his humanity existed at the moment of Mary's conception. At his resurrection, Jesus Christ's humanity also became eternal. Before resurrection, Jesus' humanity was just as weak as ours, he as a man could have sinned at any moment, but he decided not to. In a sense, Jesus as a man earned his Sonship.

[@wikilee8928]

Hebrews 2:9 But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone. As part of the Triune God, Jesus Christ is and has always been the King. It was His humanity that was crowned at resurrection. It is extremely important to remember that Jesus Christ came as a man.

[@wikilee8928]

@@paulral With due respect, there is no such thing as "Trinity", "Triune God" , "Virgin Birth", "Original Sin" etc. in Bible either, but throughout history, Christian theologians have been using them to convey complex concepts. I don't see anything wrong. I am not referring to the prodigal son parable. I am referring to Jesus' humanity.

[@wikilee8928]

​@@paulral By the way, there is no such term as Prodigal Son in the Bible either. People simply refer to it as The Parable of the Prodigal Son

[@wikilee8928]

@@paulral Spare me with the Lutheran crabs. Let me ask you this: Do you think Jesus Christ was a good carpenter when He was walking on the earth? Or He was just a lazy bum before he started preaching the Gospel? Or perhaps He magically commanded a piece of furniture appearing in front of His eyes? I am sure He was the best carpenter around. Even as Son of God Jesus Christ needed to learn the carpenter trade before starting His ministry. Do you think He needed to learn the Hebrew language? No? Magic?

[@theeternalsbeliever1779]

Jesus' humanity is not eternal, as John's epistle clearly teaches that a truly born again person is 100% incapable of committing sin. This is false theology. As of the resurrection, Christ is no longer human. Does Rev. 1's description of Christ reads like He is human in any way?

[@paulnavarro3822]

How can something be "eternally begotten"? Isn't that the same as saying "eternally coming into existence" or "eternally having a beginning? Webster Dictionary defines the noun "oxymoron" as: a combination of CONTRADICTORY or INCONGRUOUS words (such as "cruel kindness" broadly: something (such as a concept) that is made up of CONTRADICTORY and INCONGRUOUS elements The problem which I see is not with what is WRITTEN in Scripture but with the OXYMORONIC concept, idea, that Yahweh, the ONE and ONLY true God is supposed by many to be THREE in ONE. This so-called "3 in 1 god" just opens up a "bottomless can" of OXYMORONIC terms, phrases, and words. The only thing it produces is CONFUSION and so called MYSTERY (Babylon), and Videos and Books which only leave people with MORE questions. Neither Matthew nor Luke, the Authorized Biographers of Jesus, writing decades later after the Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus, EVER, EVER, say a word about a supposed "eternally begotten" Jesus. Shouldn't we have their account of the supposed "eternality" of Jesus, at least one chapter's worth, before they go into the narratives which we do have? Or, at least a simple phrase such as, "I am going to give a historical narrative about Jesus' beginning as a Man but I will omit saying anything about his pre-existence as the 'eternally begotten' son. I will leave that subject in the hands of future 4th and 5th Century Greco-Roman "catholic fathers", theologians, to figure out and to fully explain in a Creed, i.e., Athanasian." Either we as Christians believe the Scriptures or we believe the Greco-Roman "catholic" DOGMA of the "trinity", but you can't do both! The Scriptures have absolutely nothing to say about a "triune god", nor about an "eternally begotten" son, nor about "co-equal" and "co-eternal" persons, nor about a God which is a "trinity in unity", nor " the Father is God, the Son is God, the Spirit is God, yet there is but one God", all OXYMORONS! The Scriptures are clear that Only the Father, Yahweh, the One God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and of Moses, the Prophets, Jesus and the Apostles, is God ALONE, i.e., no one else is God. Jesus is the human Son of God, made immortal by God and in Heavens, seated at God's right hand, not on God's Throne. Jesus NEVER claimed to be YHWH God or a "second divine person in a trinity of gods". His claim was to be the Messiah, God's Anointed Man, the Son of God, i.e., the King of Israel, who literally was God's Human Son because He miraculously BEGOT him inside Mary's virgin womb. Mary CONCEIVED the mortal child Jesus and gave him birth, which makes Mary his Mother, but not the OXYMORONIC term, the "mother of god". If Jesus is God then it would logically follow, as the Catholics believe, that Mary is the "Mother of God (Jesus)". Protestants, you can't "have your cake and eat it" too!! Leave Rome or burn with Her!!

[@AstariahJW]

Yea came through creeds Apostate men through there philosophy Bible warns not to be misled by philosophy of men

[@IanDrenes]

A study into "Radiance" is a good place to rabbit trail a bit with John 1 when we talk about the light and true light. We are the light of the world, but Jesus is the true light. Adam was made in the image of God, but Jesus is the radiance of God (Hebrews 1).

[@nadzach]

Our walk brings first "establishes" (mark is the Hebrew word for establish) us in the faith for forgiveness through the death and resurrection of the son. The heart is the seat of desire. The king's court brings the Father into the picture. Accepting the Father's will for yourself is a quickening of the soul. The soul is the seat of the will and the motivation for action. This change results in righteousness. The third court is the Holy of holies. Here we are called to responding to "be ye holy for I am holy." This is a quickening of the mind. (This generation/quickening is interesting because you suddenly find yourself speed reading and understanding parts of the Biblical languages you never studied. The holiest place of all would be face time with God. God is a spirit, but we see John in the bosom of Christ which I think is a good description. This is a quickening of the life that has been in our blood since birth. The heart, soul and mind are our three parts. This last quickening is is a union and quickening of the whole. If you look at this as steps, which I don't like to do, the growth from grace to grace are like the notes of a chord of music. The last note is the same as the first. Here one would put aside the long glorious garments and take on the garment of the lowest household servant.. This may explain the word for master musician which has natzach as its root. Natzach describes the quickening and the gift given with the good part. (The quickening of the blood and the power to pass on as Peter passed on and came to his self beyond the iron that could not hold him.)

[@ws775]

Absolute and relative predication of the son just sounds like a contrived excuse for the contradiction of coequality of persons.

[@gabrielatwork7843]

Amazing. Thank you.

[@nadzach]

The word "hebrew" means multi-portioned. The title of the book agrees with the first words according to tradition in judaiuc literature. You can see this, too, in the first use of the word by a foreign king. That being said John or יענה is the beginning of the response of God or the "good part." Strong's will prove this true if you search "response" I'm pretty sure you will find "the beginning of the response." That being said, it's is the privilege of these to hear the still small voice. God speaks in the language of light. Some may hear thunder, others may hear the words breathed in the ear. This is an attribute of all those who believe--all those who put on the glory of God--a quickening of the spirit of life within the blood. Since in the beginning was the word, it seems like the word that became flesh might also be light. What if all the atomic particles that comprise all things were created from light. Then all things are Christ. "This is my body" becomes true in that bread is his body. The first lamb slain was also Christ. All things are of him and by him. Maybe my memory fails me, but wasn't Jesus crowned in the Proton Psalm. And apparently seen by David in a vision.. And I never understood why "this day I have begotten thee" was connected with the crowning. Yet the psalm speaks of those against him--those who want to cut the cord of love that draws them. "We beheld his glory." Elijah and Moses stood in a cleft of the same mountain at different times in history. Yet they were each translated to a moment in time when Jesus was transfigured simultaneously with the vision of a small group of disciples. Can we question when this actually occurred. Maybe they were all translated. I hope someday I will understand. Still, the first word of the Bible is the same word used by Jacob to describe his first born son at birth, when Reuben was at that time his only begotten. In my mind, the first word of the book is both the title and the subject. The entire book is about the only begotten. But John tells us that all believers have the potential to become sons of God. The way of life leads us toward the face of God. This is our goal and Jesus is the manifest presence of God. The way takes us through three courts to a fourth location which is the Mercy Seat. As our faith grows from grace to grace, we move forward on the journey. Jesus is the first son and the only begotten, but each one of us can be added to the sons of God.

[@cre8509]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. What are you referring to when you say “three courts?”

[@christinapetrou3044]

One of the best ways it helps me to understand that The Etrnal Son didnt come at a point in time is that there cannot be The Father at any point in time without The Son.. Best analogy for me in terms of understanding begotten (sun and light) just talking about timeness here..

[@DonjohnsonBG]

Questions: When did Adam become a Father? Was Adam still a Man before He had Children? God clearly said let us make man in our image, notice this principle: Genesis 5:3-4 KJV “And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and BEGAT a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth: [4] And the days of Adam after he had BEGOTTEN Seth were eight hundred years….” My point is God became a Father when He had a Son, though the Son has a beginning the Son has the same life and nature as the Father; like Seth who had a beginning yet Seth is not less of a Human. Likewise Christ says in John 5:26 KJV “For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he GIVEN TO THE SON to have life in himself” Notice life in himself is a self-existent life, it was given to Christ being begotten of the Father, this is not Christ humanity but his divinity. Evidence of his divine attributes Christ says before verse 26 in John 5:21 & 25 KJV “For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. [25] Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.” Christ also gives evidence of him being begotten of his Father in these verses: John 8:42 KJV “Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I PROCEEDED FORTH and CAME FROM GOD; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.” John 16:27 KJV “For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I CAME OUT FROM GOD.” Even the early church in the book of Acts acknowledge Christ was a real Son to God the Father; Notice: Acts 4:24-30 KJV And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is: [25] Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? [26] The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. [27] For of a truth against thy HOLY CHILD JESUS, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, [28] For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done. [29] And now, Lord, behold their threatenings: and grant unto thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak thy word, [30] By stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy HOLY CHILD JESUS.” Child was said twice and it was addressed to God they wasn’t! Praying to Mary, so what is a Child? If you don’t see that the Son of God was truly born of God his Father you have to be spiritually blind.

[@robertbatista50]

So Grudem is no longer incarnational Sonship but holds to Eternal Sonship. I’d be interested in knowing what changed his mind. MacArthur also switched over several years ago.

[@jotink1]

I believe Dr Irons helped in that decision

[@Scott48-w9i]

No eternal son 1 Chronicles 17:13

[@upclosepersonal]

Grown men believing in a trinity How sad. All the explanations stink, it's all crooked. It's all wrong, and it's on light. What kind of clubhouse do you guys belong to

[@ws775]

Well I am a heretic then. Excellent discussion though. Listening to trinitarian explanations helps me prove out my oneness beliefs.