Greek word studies are more definitive than English KJV words (variant readings can be resolved and the KJV text family/Byzantine is usually inferior).
How many times was Christ begotten?
by GOrwell 33 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
jonathan dough
PodoBear: John 1:18 explains that the "Son" was monogenetic, begotten/created by Almighty God of the same substance.
This teaching is incorrect.
The Word was “begotten,” but not made, not created - (John 1:14) [Top]
In a similar vein, the Jehovah's Witnesses teach that Jesus was “begotten” in the sense that he was created or born, which is not a Christian Trinitarian teaching. The Jehovah's Witnesses write:
Trinitarians claim that in the case of Jesus, “only-begotten” is not the same as the dictionary definition of “begetting,” which is to “procreate as the father.” (Webster’s Ninth Collegiate Dictionary) They say that in Jesus’ case it means “the sense of unoriginated relationship,” a sort of only son relationship without the begetting. (Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words) Does that sound logical to you? Can a man father a son without begetting him?
Furthermore, why does the Bible use the very same Greek word for “only-begotten” (as Vine admits without any explanation) to describe the relationship of Isaac to Abraham? Hebrews 11:17 speaks of Isaac as Abraham’s “only-begotten son.” There can be no question that in Isaac’s case, he was only-begotten in the normal sense, not equal in time or position to his father. (Should You Believe, Chapter 6)
Actually, Strong and Vine’s does in fact explain why the very same Greek word for “only-begotten” (monogeneses) is used to describe the relationship of Isaac to Abraham, and how “only-begotten” is used with respect to Isaac at Hebrews 11:17 as subsequently explained.
One major weakness in the Jehovah's Witnesses’ argument lies in the fact that Isaac was not an only-begotten son in the natural procreative sense since Abraham actually had another son, Ishmael, (and others after Ishmael) who was born before Isaac (Genesis 16:15), so the Jehovah's Witnesses’ reliance on that verse is unfounded. Because Abraham had no less than two sons, “only-begotten” cannot be applied to Isaac as an “only-begotten son,” in the procreative sense because he wasn’t. It applied to him in a religious, legalistic and figurative connotation as he was the only legitimate son; it refers to a non-biological relationship just as Trinitarians teach with respect to the Word.
It’s the same with the preexistent Christ where “only-begotten” lays stress on characteristics of Christ’s relationship. The phrase “the only-begotten of (from) the Father,” (John 1:14) indicates that as the Son of God He was the sole representative of the Being and character of the One who sent Him,” compared to the original traditional rendering where the definite article is omitted (Strong and Vine’s, 67). Strong and Vine’s speaks of a unique relationship and stresses that “begotten” does not imply a beginning of Sonship nor generation as applied to offspring like Isaac, or that Christ became the only begotten son by incarnation.
Monogeneses is translated (1) “only” in (1a) Lk 7:12 of the widow of Nain’s son; (1b) Lk 8:42 of Jairus’ daughter; (2) “only-begotten” (2a) of Jesus in Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 Jn 4:9; (2) of Isaac in Heb 11:17; and (3) “only child” in Lk 9:38 of the devil-possessed child.
(4) With reference to Christ, the phrase “the only begotten of (from) the Father,” Jn 1:14, indicates that as the Son of God He was the sole representative of the Being and character of the One who sent Him. (4a) In the original the definite article is omitted both before “only begotten” and before “Father,” and its absence in each case serves to lay stress upon the characteristics referred to in the terms used.
(4b) The apostle’s object is to demonstrate what sort of glory it was that he and his fellow apostles had seen. (4c) That he is not merely making a comparison with earthly relationships is indicated by para, “from.” (4d) The glory was that of a unique relationship and the word “begotten” does not imply a beginning of His Sonship. (4e) It suggests relationship indeed, but must be distinguished from generation as applied to man.
(5) We can only rightly understand the term “the only begotten” when used of the Son, in the sense of un-originated relationship. (5a) The begetting is not an event of time, however remote, but a fact irrespective of time. (5b) The Christ did not become, but necessarily and eternally is the Son. He, a Person, possesses every attribute of pure Godhood. (5c) This necessitates eternity, absolute being; in this respect He is not ‘after’ the Father;
(8) In Jn 3:16 the statement, “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son” must not be taken to mean that Christ became the only begotten son by incarnation. (8a) The value and greatness of the gift lay in the Sonship of Him who was given. (8b) His Sonship was not the effect of His being given. (Strong and Vine’s, 167)
Hebrews 1:5 also argues against the Jehovah's Witnesses’ “procreation definition” because “begotten” is used with reference to the enthronement of the existing Christ; an Old Testament parallel to Psalm 2:6-8.
Lastly, even an English definition of “beget” as applied to Christ means to bring into a special relationship, and not by procreation.
(10) Beget in English means to bring into a special relationship. The “be” is intensive and “get” means to bring to one’s self. Jesus, as “the only-begotten of the Father” means that even though he had the unique and equal relationship within the Trinity in eternity past, He took upon Himself the likeness of sinful flesh, dwelt among men, was tempted in all ways, yet without sin, submitted to the death on the cross, was raised on the third day, and ascended to the right hand of the Father. He was always uniquely related to the Father, but even more so now as He is the only unique Son of God, the only sacrifice to remove sins and restore fallen man to God.
-
Podobear
@JohnathanDough: I would like to cut through all the anti JW diatribe and stick to research thanks. As I have recorded before I AM AN EX PENTECOSTAL and A JW WALKAWAY (1984), so I would ask you to stop using me and others as a sounding board for antiJW attack. Most of us have made our own minds up, and for our own reasons.
On the subject of John 1:18, you know all too well that modern translations use "only begotten god", in reference to the pre human Jesus. This human term, as you quite rightly explain is not used in any "human" sense of procreation... but explains simply the creation of a being of the same nature as God...made of the same stuff.
Back to GOrwells question: My answer remains, technically once. The Christ, The Messiah, The Sent Forth One was himself created... he is Monogenetic, in the bosom of his Father.
-
Band on the Run
I think we get too literal about these matters b/c of our Witness background. He was not created. It seems strange to think of humans in heaven being created, giving birth. I don't think he had a mother in heaven. Maybe the preVirgin Mary. It gets crazy. Stringing together Bible verses out of context does not help understanding. The Witnesses teach that he is Michael? I thought Michael was one archangel, not the Messiah or God.
I know the creed, begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father, through him, all things were created and have their being.
It took a long time to get the creed worked out. I've carefully noted any reference in the NT to a possible Trinity or absence of Trinity. It is confusing. No one is thinking in those terms at the time. His nature is the most important part of Christianity to us but, obviously, 1st century Christians did not need to fles out any understanding. I choose Trinity b/c I see no evidence of lack of Trinity and I want it to be Trinity. Jesus has always been so palpable and important to me. Jehovah, I spit on Him. God seems remote.
God is a concept by which we measure our pain. If Jesus is God and begotten, the larger question is what is God. The Bible has a host of ideas as to what God is. The creed is ungainly to me. Jesus was begotten, not made. Did He exist before the universe? I no longer think of three persons but many billions. He hung out with the FAther in heaven before creation. What did Jesus do? Sometimes not asking too many questions is easier. God is multifaced. C.S, Lewis points out that we only know God on earth. It is bizarre that earth is the only planet with life forms in the universe. Reading physics can also drive you crazy if you conceive of it as God's force.
-
jonathan dough
Podobear: @JohnathanDough: I would like to cut through all the anti JW diatribe and stick to research thanks. As I have recorded before I AM AN EX PENTECOSTAL and A JW WALKAWAY (1984), so I would ask you to stop using me and others as a sounding board for antiJW attack. Most of us have made our own minds up, and for our own reasons.
I honestly don't know what you're talking about. You made the incorrect statement that begotten = created, and I corrected you with research which you claim I did not provide, research which argues that begotten does not mean created. I wasn't attacking you because you are a Witness, or were a witness, but you also believe, like they do, that the term "begotten" means only "created." My response goes right to the heart of the issue. Before you can answer "how many times begotten," you have to get past the issue of the meaning of begotten. If "begotten" means not created but implies an eternal existance, then the answer is "none" because the Logos has always been begotten. Your answer presupposes, incorrectly, that begotten means created, but 2 billion Christians disagree with you, not to mention the Bible and the Greek language. I just don't see your point.
http://www.144000.110mb.com/directory/jehovahs_witnesses_research_resources.html
-
Podobear
@Jonathan dough: I disagree with you.
What is your answer to GOrwells question? How many times was Christ begotten?
The Scriptures tell us he was: Monogenes... "the only begotten god" NASB
-
Band on the Run
wHO wrote the scriptures? It was not Cecil B. DeMille with sparkly visual effects. How many scriptures do you hook on to each other? Believe it or not, Mark did not call John on his cell phone to coordinate their writings. HOw did the author(s) get insight? I doubt if God moved their fingers and they acted as automatons. The Church taught the Risen Christ was God. If Jesus had the Witness status, who would care? Another do good social prophet causing a ruckus. Stephen had to say more than Jesus taught good morals to be stoned by the Jews. For a religion that stressed the transcedence of God, pure heresy had to be heard.
Begotten for me is a human attempt to grasp Jesus, human, being also divine. This is the folly of the cross. Otherwise, Paul would write more about the Sermon on the Mount and his miracles. Humans struggling to find human language for that which is NOT human. Until Jesus. Every other religion had a dying and rising god that was human in some aspect. You would think they would note the command strand and check out the lit of other religions.
I get so riled up about scriptural correctness. The Pharisees were exquisite Biblical scholars yet Jesus chose no theologians or Hebrew experts. Rather, he chose fisherman who are very clueless and ineffectual until Pentecost. The experience of Christ in the present moment mattered. If I can quote Koine Greek and know my gospel parallels but live an amoral life with no love what does it matter. Jesus did not state to perform a ritual purity test for scripture but to love one another as he loved us. I am absolutely certain there were many more accomplished Bible scholars than Jesus. I experience Christ as present. The Church taught that Jesus is not only human but God. I am certain the pagans lined up before Jews did.
-
godrulz
Words have a semantic range of meaning. In a context about Christ, there is a difference between monogenes/gennao. Other verses show that He is uncreated God. Begotten can refer to His uniqueness, His resurrection, his physical birth, etc. This is not an argument against His Deity, just that words applied to Christ are not always identical to ones about Abraham, etc. Context determines which range of meaning a word has.
-
jonathan dough
Podobear: @Jonathan dough: I disagree with you.
What is your answer to GOrwells question? How many times was Christ begotten?
But I did answer you. You framed the question in terms of the Word, pre-creation, in the beginning, in the context of creation, claiming that begotten means created, and I stated:
"If "begotten" means not created but implies an eternal existance, then the answer is "none" because the Logos has always been begotten." You might consider actually reading my posts rather than giving us a knee-jerk reaction.
Like Godrulz pointed out, the use of the word "begotten" depends on the context. The created humanity of the God-man Jesus (economic trinity) , who was not God, was begotten to Mary 2,000 years ago. As the Word (immanent trinity) He was never begotten in terms of being created because the Word is eternal. I know you disagree with me, but you have yet been able to prove your position. Merely calling yourself right doesn't make you right. You're shifting the focus now to the original question (How many times was Christ begotten?) even though you opened the door to a narrower issue, namely, that begotten means created, which it doesn't.
-
GOrwell
How many times was Christ begotten? Hmm, I'm not seeing a 'simple' answer.. please one word answers only.. once or twice or thrice?