Featured God No One Has Seen At Any Time

It must be understood that SBG believes that the Second Person of the Trinity was not always the Son, but that He became the Son when the child was born unto us by Mary.

 

Interesting reading. Especially the last paragraph.
The Text of the Gospels: John 1:18 - Some Patristic Evidence

Arius of Alexandria (250-336) and
Auxentius
of Milan (d. 374). Arius is the infamous heretic; Auxentius is an Arian bishop who held the office of bishop in Milan in the 300s before Ambrose. Auxentius, in his creedal statement of Arian beliefs, said that Wulfilas (translator of the Gothic version, and regarded as an Arian late in his career) taught that God the Father “did create and beget, make, and establish an only-begotten God (unigenitum deum).” Auxentius used the term “only-begotten God” three more times:
(1) Auxentius stated that Wulfilas handed down the argument that “If the inexhaustible power of the only-begotten God (unigeniti dei) is reliably said to be capable of having made all things celestial and terrestrial, invisible and visible, and is believed rightly and faithfully by us Christians, why is it not credited that the passionless power of God the Father might create His only-begotten Son?”
(2) Auxentius stated that Wulfilas “spread abroad, by his words and tractates, that the Father and the Son were different in their divinity, unbegotten God and only-begotten God (dei ingeniti et dei unigeniti).
(3) Auxentius stated, “An unbegotten God being in existence, and one Lord only-begotten existing by God, the Holy Spirit Advocate can be said to be neither God nor Lord.”

Although Auxentius never cites John 1:18, it is at least clear from his statements that Arians in the 300s had no objection to the phrase “only begotten God.” This phrase does not appear in John 1:18 in any Old Latin manuscripts; yet the Arians in the West were entirely comfortable using it. The notion that the reading in John 1:18 with θεός was a particularly powerful weapon in defense of Trinitarian orthodoxy rings hollow in light of this; it is rather baffling to find modern apologists treating the reading “only-begotten God” as if it is a bulwark against Arianism. (See, for example, Bob Utley’s claim that John 1:18 with “only-begotten God” is “a strong affirmation of the full and complete deity of Jesus!”)