The decrees of God were issued in eternity. There was never a time when the Lord Jesus was not the only begotten Son of God (eg. John 17:24).
Steve
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Only begotten
- Thread starter agedman
- Start date
Steve
Thank you! :love2: I have also been blessed by your posts.
I have read this in Carson's Exegetical Fallacies. I don't think there's any way of proving it one way or the other.
I'm not sure it has anything to do with being English. With regard to Heb 11:17, I think the point is that Isaac is a type of Christ (long promised; miraculously born; persecuted by his brethren [Ishmael]; offered up by his father; the children of God come from him). I don't really have a problem with our Lord being called the 'unique Son,' but the reason that He is unique is that He is, in the words of the Creed, 'Begotten not made, being of one substance with the Father by whom all things were made.' I therefore think that 'Only begotten' is better.
Steve
The Archangel[/QUOTE]
Did The Spirit God in the egg/seed of the virgin Mary cause that egg to conceive and grow within her and be brought fourth from her her firstborn, a man child? This child grew into manhood as the sinless son of man and died as a man still sinless. God who this sinless man child called the Father and his Father raised him from the dead. Gave him life again. Did he raise him, Jesus from the dead as a man, saying thou art my son this day have I begotten thee or as God or as a hybrid of the two? It is said that he by inheritance he obtained a name more excellent than the angels. What is that name and just when did he inherit it? Is he on the right hand of God as a resurrected man with eternal life that God, who cannot lie promised before time began or as something else.
Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. When? When was he anointed? Acts 2:33?
Acts 2:34,35 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Until I make thy foes thy footstool.
Matt 22:42 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, Saying, What think ye of the Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, [The Son] of David.
his only begotten son.........the only begotten of the Father........declared the Son of God by the resurrection from the dead......the firstborn from the dead.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you may be forgetting the pre-existence of the Lord Jesus Christ.
This is from the 1689 Baptist Confession. All other orthodox confesions are similar.
There was never a time when the Lord Jesus was not the Only Begotten of the Father. There was a time when He took on flesh and appeared among men.
Steve
This is from the 1689 Baptist Confession. All other orthodox confesions are similar.
My emphasis.
There was never a time when the Lord Jesus was not the Only Begotten of the Father. There was a time when He took on flesh and appeared among men.
Steve
Reply to Agedman,
The Greek word translated begotten, means one of a kind, not one and only or "naturally born." Mono=one, Genes=kind.
But the reason for my post is to question the assumption that we become heirs by adoption. We become heirs when we are born again and this does not equate with adoption. Adoption refers to our bodily resurrection and is part of our "inheritance" as a born again believer.
In Romans 8:15 we have received the "Spirit of Adoption" which refers to our indwelt Spirit given as a pledge to our inheritance.
In Romans 8:23 we see where we wait for our "adoption as son" thus something that occurs in our future after we are saved or "born again."
In Galatians 4:5 two future events are listed, being redeemed which equates in my opinion with being saved and born anew, and being adopted which equates with our bodily resurrection when Christ returns.
In Ephesians 1:5 were are predestined to adoption as sons, through Jesus Christ. Thus, in my opinion, when we are placed spiritually in Christ, we are predestined to be bodily resurrected as sons of God.
The Greek word translated adoption means "son-make" and refers to God's action of making someone a son. We become a spiritual son of God when we are born anew and a physical son of God at our bodily resurrection and its this second creative act that I believe Paul has in view when he uses the term translated adoption.
But candor requires that I address Romans 9:4 where Paul uses the term to refer to the physical offspring of the Jewish Patriarchs. God corporately chose Abraham, Israel and so on to provide the blood line of descent to Jesus. So it is a stretch for sure, but it fits with "making a physical son".
In Ephesians 1:11 Paul tells us we have obtained an inheritance and that inheritance is predestined, and what is predestined? Our "adoption" as sons.
The Greek word translated begotten, means one of a kind, not one and only or "naturally born." Mono=one, Genes=kind.
But the reason for my post is to question the assumption that we become heirs by adoption. We become heirs when we are born again and this does not equate with adoption. Adoption refers to our bodily resurrection and is part of our "inheritance" as a born again believer.
In Romans 8:15 we have received the "Spirit of Adoption" which refers to our indwelt Spirit given as a pledge to our inheritance.
In Romans 8:23 we see where we wait for our "adoption as son" thus something that occurs in our future after we are saved or "born again."
In Galatians 4:5 two future events are listed, being redeemed which equates in my opinion with being saved and born anew, and being adopted which equates with our bodily resurrection when Christ returns.
In Ephesians 1:5 were are predestined to adoption as sons, through Jesus Christ. Thus, in my opinion, when we are placed spiritually in Christ, we are predestined to be bodily resurrected as sons of God.
The Greek word translated adoption means "son-make" and refers to God's action of making someone a son. We become a spiritual son of God when we are born anew and a physical son of God at our bodily resurrection and its this second creative act that I believe Paul has in view when he uses the term translated adoption.
But candor requires that I address Romans 9:4 where Paul uses the term to refer to the physical offspring of the Jewish Patriarchs. God corporately chose Abraham, Israel and so on to provide the blood line of descent to Jesus. So it is a stretch for sure, but it fits with "making a physical son".
In Ephesians 1:11 Paul tells us we have obtained an inheritance and that inheritance is predestined, and what is predestined? Our "adoption" as sons.
Last edited by a moderator:
Would you agree with the following?
1 Cor 11:8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. The first man Adam.
1 Cor 11:12 For as the woman [is] of the man, even so [is] the man also by the woman; Jesus the one to come in the figure of Adam.
But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
Did God take something that had been eternally begotten and put it in the woman or was his seed conceived by the woman's and his Son was brought fourth. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
Hi Percho, I could not follow your line of reasoning. "Begotten" is based on a mistranslation of the Greek, with the correct meaning being "one of a kind."
As far as the conception of Jesus, many have speculated on what happened. As far as I know, one of the views is that God created a "male" sperm and had it enter Mary's egg.
Since she was a virgin, the sperm was not "implanted" in the usual way, because then she would not be a virgin giving birth. As far as the spirit God forms within us, many also accept that the "Word" the second person of the Trinity entered the conceptus, giving Jesus life.
But I must stress, all the above is pure man-made speculation, with the actual process being addressed only vaguely in scripture.
This view has her seed (her egg) becoming the Son of Man who crushed the Serpent.
So as far as I know, it is consistent with all scripture. But if someone posts a scripturally based contradiction, I will amend my view.
As far as the conception of Jesus, many have speculated on what happened. As far as I know, one of the views is that God created a "male" sperm and had it enter Mary's egg.
Since she was a virgin, the sperm was not "implanted" in the usual way, because then she would not be a virgin giving birth. As far as the spirit God forms within us, many also accept that the "Word" the second person of the Trinity entered the conceptus, giving Jesus life.
But I must stress, all the above is pure man-made speculation, with the actual process being addressed only vaguely in scripture.
This view has her seed (her egg) becoming the Son of Man who crushed the Serpent.
So as far as I know, it is consistent with all scripture. But if someone posts a scripturally based contradiction, I will amend my view.
Believe that the Greek refers to jesus to be set apart in His own seperate cathegory, that he was/is the UNIQUE Son of God, as paul would say, by birth not adoption as rest of us are!
And Jesus was conceived by the HS within mary, scripture silent how, doubt was sperm as in a physical act, as the nature of God Himself was fused with human nature forever at that time!
Last edited by a moderator:
Not to put too fine a point on it, but "one of a kind" means "unique."
No verse says or suggests we are set apart by adoption. Usually our adoption refers to our physical resurrection at the second coming of Christ.
actually, per the Apostle paul, adoption is our current/present status in Christ, we are co-heirs with Him right now, but that will be fully realised when we are glorofied at Second Coming of Christ!
Hi Percho, I could not follow your line of reasoning. "Begotten" is based on a mistranslation of the Greek, with the correct meaning being "one of a kind."
That's fine, now tell be how kind, kind?
You know it is hard to ask that question without implying, to be.
Did he become one of a kind by creation of by being begotten for you also have to tie it to the word son?
In the beginning God. Sounds as if God was already there but when speaking of the Son, to be always seems to be there.
Last edited by a moderator:
Were are we so far?
So far, we then should see the verse translated with the words:
"gave his one, only, covenant, unique, begotten, natural born son"
Anymore ideas that would show that the NIV might need to be strengthen on this verse?
Seems we are a bit stuck on how to find an adequate word and need multiple words to translate what the KJB stated in the word "begotten."
Any more thoughts?
So far, we then should see the verse translated with the words:
"gave his one, only, covenant, unique, begotten, natural born son"
Anymore ideas that would show that the NIV might need to be strengthen on this verse?
Seems we are a bit stuck on how to find an adequate word and need multiple words to translate what the KJB stated in the word "begotten."
Any more thoughts?
Actually this is a pure fiction, no verse or passage will be referenced to support this falsehood.
Do a study of how Paul uses the Greek word, if you know enough to be able to find all his usages.
Hint, Jesusfan, flip open an exhaustive concordance and look up adopt and adoption and see where and how Paul uses the word.
My view is well stated at Romans 8:23.
Last edited by a moderator:
Not to put too fine a point on it Agedman, but the question has been asked and answered. Monogenes means one kind and is always used to refer to a one of a kind person. The one of a kind son or daughter, or Son, Christ Jesus. Only is not what the word means, begotten is a well recognized mistranslation, natural born simply reworks the mistranslation and perpetuates it.
Actually this is a pure fiction, no verse or passage will be referenced to support this falsehood.
Do a study of how Paul uses the Greek word, if you know enough to be able to find all his usages.
Hint, Jesusfan, flip open an exhaustive concordance and look up adopt and adoption and see where and how Paul uses the word.
My view is well stated at Romans 8:23.
We have been saved by God, from eternity past opredestined by him to be placed into His Son, saved now, as we received jesus into our lives, sealed by the Hs of promise, and will be saved, when glorifed with Him!
The Archangel
Well-Known Member
Wrong.
Actually this is a pure fiction, no verse or passage will be referenced to support this falsehood.
Do a study of how Paul uses the Greek word, if you know enough to be able to find all his usages.
Hint, Jesusfan, flip open an exhaustive concordance and look up adopt and adoption and see where and how Paul uses the word.
My view is well stated at Romans 8:23.
As you point out, there are other occurrences of the word "adoption" and not all of them mean or refer to the same thing.
You are hanging your understanding on only one usage, and in doing so, you are, essentially, hanging yourself.
You have stated: " Usually our adoption refers to our physical resurrection at the second coming of Christ" This is not correct.
Paul uses the word υἱοθεσία five times:
1. Romans 8:15
[12] So then, brothers, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. [13] For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. [14] For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. [15] For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!” [16] The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, [17] and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him. (Romans 8:12-17 ESV; emphasis mine)
In verse 15, "adoption" is preceded by the verb "have received." This is an Aorist verb, indicating the "reception" of adoption happened in past time. The event, the adoption, is seen in its totality. There is no hint of a "future" adoption here.
2. Romans 8:23
[18] For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. [19] For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. [20] For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope [21] that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. [22] For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. [23] And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. [24] For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? [25] But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience. (Romans 8:18-25 ESV; emphasis mine)
In this instance, Paul does indeed relate "adoption" to the redemption of our bodies. However, to say that is the sum-total of adoption is to do violence to this text and the other usages.
You completely discount that Paul, only a matter of words earlier, states: "we ourselves...have the firstfruits of the Spirit..." Paul is clearly talking about "firstfruits" here as relating to "adoption." What is the indicator of our coming adoption? We have already been given the Spirit. So, it cannot be, textually or otherwise, that adoption is confined only to the redemption of our bodies.
Truly, we "already" have adoption and we have "not yet" been adopted. But, this will become clear as we press on to view uses 3-5.
3. Romans 9:4
I am speaking the truth in Christ—I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit—[2] that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. [3] For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. [4] They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. [5] To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen. (Romans 9:1-5 ESV; emphasis mine)
In this passage, Paul is clearly stating that the Israelites have already been "adopted," so to speak. He is referencing the Corporate Election of the Old Testament. This is not something Israel is waiting for; they already have it. Now, of course, Paul is not here equating adoption with salvation. But, the usage here of the word "adoption" is not eschatalogical. Rather, it is an existent reality--The Nation of Israel has been adopted by God (though they, obviously, failed to live up to all that this adoption required of them).
4. Galatians 4:5
I mean that the heir, as long as he is a child, is no different from a slave, though he is the owner of everything, [2] but he is under guardians and managers until the date set by his father. [3] In the same way we also, when we were children, were enslaved to the elementary principles of the world. [4] But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, [5] to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. [6] And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!” [7] So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God. (Galatians 4:1-7 ESV; emphasis mine)
In this passage, which is quite enlightening, Paul clearly states that adoption is the result of Christ's work of redemption. In other words, Christ died so that we could, indeed, be adopted by God. Now, the grammar views the "adoption" as a single event, likely in the past (hence the Aorist Subjunctive). But, the Aorist shouldn't be pushed too far.
But, we really don't need to dissect the grammar here to understand that the adoption has already taken place. Paul clearly calls the believers in Galatia "sons." So, the adoption has already taken place. Further evidence of the adoption having already taken place is given in the following verses where Paul clearly states "You...are a son...[and] an heir." The Present Active Indicative of the verb "to be" here tells us that the "adoption" is a present reality, it is not something reserved for the far off future.
5. Ephesians 1:5
[3] Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, [4] even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love [5] he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, [6] to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. [7] In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, [8] which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight [9] making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ [10] as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth. (Ephesians 1:3-10 ESV; emphasis mine)
This passage makes it absolutely clear that "adoption" is something that is a result of God's sovereign choice and His predestining persons to be "adopted." The language here, especially, shows that we are indeed set apart by adoption. It is the present adoption of believers that is a result of God's plan. Adoption does not bring election; election brings adoption.
So, while you may be right that there is an eschatological understanding of "adoption," it is certainly not the only use of the word.
Paul's five uses make quite clear what many of the great theologians have already pointed out: Those who are believers are already adopted even as they are not yet adopted.
This tension between the "Already" and "Not Yet" is important and difficult. Yet Paul's usage make it absolutely clear that this is what he has in mind: An "already" adoption waiting for a fuller, "not yet" adoption.
The Archangel
Also, when one goes to the Apostle Johns 3 letters, especially 1 John and his reference to all sainst as being "dear chidren, beloved of /by the father"...
Refers to present relationship/fellowship with God...
pretty much , at least in part, we here and now, adopted children of God!
Reply to Archangel
Why do Calvinists have such a difficult time just reading the text?
Romans 8:15 says we who have been born again have received in the past the "Spirit of Adoption" which is our indwelt Holy Spirit given as a pledge to our future adoption, our physical resurrection in a glorified body.
Romans 8:23 clearly indicates our adoption refers to our bodily resurrection.
Romans 9:4 does refer to the corporate election of Israel, and hence their adoption as sons. This is the only verse where adoption does not refer to our bodily resurrection.
Galatians 4:5 again says those who have been redeemed, past tense, look forward to adoption as sons. So this verse again matches my view, everyone who is born again is a "spiritual child (son) of God" and thus an "heir" to their inheritance which is the physical adoption of bodily resurrection.
And finally Ephesians 1:5 again says those born again are predestined to be adopted in the future, which refers to our bodily resurrection.
So in 4 our of 5 usages, Paul uses the term to refer to our future bodily resurrection. And that of course is what I said.
Just read it folks, the message is clear.
Why do Calvinists have such a difficult time just reading the text?
Romans 8:15 says we who have been born again have received in the past the "Spirit of Adoption" which is our indwelt Holy Spirit given as a pledge to our future adoption, our physical resurrection in a glorified body.
Romans 8:23 clearly indicates our adoption refers to our bodily resurrection.
Romans 9:4 does refer to the corporate election of Israel, and hence their adoption as sons. This is the only verse where adoption does not refer to our bodily resurrection.
Galatians 4:5 again says those who have been redeemed, past tense, look forward to adoption as sons. So this verse again matches my view, everyone who is born again is a "spiritual child (son) of God" and thus an "heir" to their inheritance which is the physical adoption of bodily resurrection.
And finally Ephesians 1:5 again says those born again are predestined to be adopted in the future, which refers to our bodily resurrection.
So in 4 our of 5 usages, Paul uses the term to refer to our future bodily resurrection. And that of course is what I said.
Just read it folks, the message is clear.
Jesusfan, why continue to post fiction, John does not support your view either!
When a person is born of God, they are children of God. Not adopted but spiritually born anew!!!!! Why is this so difficult?
John 1:12-13 lays it all out yet again. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.NKJV
After a person believes, then they are given the right to become children of God. When a person is born again spiritually, that gives them the right as an heir, to become a child of God which refers to our physical resurrection. Those who believe in His name are born of God - born anew spiritually. And that spiritual birth gives us the right to our adoption or physical resurrection.
When a person is born of God, they are children of God. Not adopted but spiritually born anew!!!!! Why is this so difficult?
John 1:12-13 lays it all out yet again. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.NKJV
After a person believes, then they are given the right to become children of God. When a person is born again spiritually, that gives them the right as an heir, to become a child of God which refers to our physical resurrection. Those who believe in His name are born of God - born anew spiritually. And that spiritual birth gives us the right to our adoption or physical resurrection.