Is Jesus the Eternal or Begotten Son of God?

Summary

Summary prepared by Acts 2:38 Life from the transcript below — the preacher’s words follow in full.

God manifest in the flesh — eternal as God, beginning as man

• The question posed (in the host's frame): John (the verse as the frame gives it) refers to Jesus, as the only begotten Son of God. There are some theologians, which throw around a phrase: Eternal son. And there is what is called Eternal sonship ('Eternal sunship', as heard in the frame): that view says Jesus has eternally existed, as the Son of God. And according to this view: Christ is, and always has been, the Son of God. Now, to add to the confusion that I see: a statement of faith (as the frame cites it) states that Jesus is the eternally begotten, of the father. What are we to make of all this? Is Jesus Eternal? Is Jesus begotten? What should we think about this? The answer: we have to go to scripture, for our answer. When we go to the Bible, the word of God, we find that Jesus Christ is God manifest In the Flesh. According to Colossians (the verse as he gives it): in him — Jesus Christ — dwells all the fullness of the godhead, bodily. So the key is to understand, first of all: bodily, Jesus was a real human being. As a human: he had a beginning. He was conceived, in the womb of the Virgin Mary, who was his mother — his biological mother. And she bore him, and brought him to birth. And so, on his human side: he had a beginning. He was conceived, and born. But, at the same time, he was God manifest in flesh. So the one spirit of God is eternal. Of course: God has no beginning. God has no ending. He is eternal. He stands above, and beyond, time. So: viewing Jesus as a human, he had a beginning, in his humanness. Viewing Jesus as God: he is eternal. He is both, at the same time.

Scriptures: Colossians 2:9

Begotten means a beginning — the scriptural definition

• Now, when you talk about the term Son: by definition, the term son implies a beginning. A begetting ('a beting', as heard). And it's interesting: the Bible does speak of the begotten son. And in normal human speech, begotten means a beginning. The act of the father ('the ACT of the father', as the capitals stand), in causing a child to be conceived. That's what it means, to be begotten. And so the term begotten, and the term son, in normal human speech, would clearly indicate a beginning. But it would be a beginning, according to the Flesh. In fact, we find this exact statement in Luke (the verse as he gives it). And this is the Angel Gabriel, speaking to Mary, the mother of Jesus. Before Jesus was conceived. And the angel tells her what's going to happen. And I'm reading here, from the new King James version. And here's what the angel told her. The holy spirit will come upon you. And the power of the highest will overshadow you. Therefore also, that Holy one who is to be born will be called The Son of God. Here we have a scriptural definition, of why Jesus is called the Son of God. It doesn't say: he's the Incarnation, of an eternal second person, whose name is son. It says: he will be called The Son of God, because the spirit of God caused his conception. The word therefore: because God's spirit overshadowed his mother, and miraculously caused the baby to be conceived, therefore he's called the Son of God. So I have three children. I have two sons. They're called my son, because I'm the one who caused conception. No one else. Jesus was not conceived Naturally, by Joseph. He was not conceived by any other human man. But he was conceived, by the miraculous power of God's spirit. So therefore: literally, God caused the conception. He is the — Jesus, that baby, that child — is the Son of God. The son of Mary. And the Son of God, by a miracle. So here we find the New Testament, using the term son, in the very same way we would use the term. And speaking of the begetting of the Son ('the begetting of the Sun', as the capitals stand), in the very same way that we would use that. So when we hear begotten son: we think according to the flesh. According to the humanity. Galatians (the verse as he gives it) says: when the fullness of time was come, God sent forth his son, made of a woman, made under the law. So the son is not Eternal. The son had a beginning. The son was made of a woman — Mary. Made during the time of the law. Not from eternity (a stray letter stands in the delivered text at this turn). So if you're going to posit an eternal son: you would have to have an eternal mother. And you'd have to have an eternal law. Both of those are incorrect. Now, Hebrews (the chapter as he gives it) — which quotes from a prophecy, from Psalms: God says, to the son: Thou Art my son. This day, have I begotten thee. So the begetting of the son ('the begetting of the sun', as the capitals stand) occurred, at a certain point of time. Hebrews is not talking about a conversation, between two pre-existent persons. It's a prophecy, from Psalms, that's fulfilled in Jesus Christ. When Jesus was born, as a baby: he was literally begotten, by the power of God. Then there's a further usage: that when Jesus arose (from) the dead, he was the first human being to be raised from the dead, with a glorified human body. So therefore it's spoken of, as him being begotten from the dead. The first begotten, or firstborn, from the dead. But in either case: you're talking about a specific point in time. The Bible never says Eternal son. It says only begotten son. The Bible never says God the son, as if son were a Divine title. It says the Son of God. It's a human title. It signifies — the term Son of God literally signifies — that Jesus is God manifested In the Flesh. But that title of son always has reference, to the Incarnation. It refers to the whole person, who Jesus Is: God manifest in the flesh. But it's given in the context of time, and humanity, and Incarnation.

Scriptures: Luke 1:35; Galatians 4:4; Hebrews 1; Psalms (book-only)

Eternal sonship examined — the church-history circle

• Now, in John (the verse as he gives it; a fused caption timestamp fragment is struck from this sentence by the recorded fix): only begotten son. Many Greek Scholars will say: well, the focus is not on the act of begetting ('on the act of be getting', as the words split), but unique. One of a kind. And that's fine. But the point is: if you're going to put a time to it, begetting is a point in time. It relates to the Incarnation. Now, in trinitarian theology, they teach that there are three Eternal persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. So they say that the son is eternal. And the son is eternally being begotten, by the father. Now, one of the big debates, in church history, was: if you have two persons (in) the godhead, and one person begets the other person, then the second person is inferior. Is not Eternal. Is subordinate. Gets his Source, from the first person. And so they're not equal. And that's what Aras taught, in the 400s (the name as heard; its standard spelling stands in this record's delivery note). And so the counsil of NAA — and then later, the counsil of Constantinople — went against that (both as heard; the standard forms stand in the delivery note). To say: no, Jesus didn't have a beginning. He's not a secondary being. And so they had to come up with this idea: begotten relates to Eternity. So then you ask: well, what is this — if it's not a point in time? And if it's not the flesh? God begets another God. One person begets another person. And this is eternal happening. It's always been happening. What does that even mean? And so the answer of theologians is: we can't say what it means. It's part of the mystery of the godhead. What does it mean, to say one person begets another person? We can't explain that. What does it mean, to say it's been happening eternally, and it's still happening, and it always will happen? We can't say that. We don't know what it means. But they end up saying: whatever it means, begetting is what makes the second person different, from the first person. So then you ask: well, how do you know they're two persons? Because the father is unbegotten. The son is begotten. So that they're different. In fact, in trinitarian theology, that is the only absolute difference, between the first and the second person: that the father is unbegotten, the son is begotten. But then you ask: what does that mean? The answer is: well, it's what makes the two different. So they're arguing in a circle. Because when you ask what does begetting mean: it's what the father does, to be different from the Son. Well, why do you think (that) father and the son are two different (persons)? ('what you know why do you think their father and the son are too different', as the sentence stands). Because one is unbegotten, the other is begotten. So you basically just argued in a circle. And the whole thing is mysterious. It has no objective meaning. I don't think that's what the Bible is saying. The Bible is not a philosophical conundrum, that makes no objective sense, to normal human beings. But the Bible is very clearly saying: in the beginning, there is the Eternal God. God became incarnate, In the Flesh. No human being could be the father of that child. God himself, through a miracle — not a carnal conception, but the spirit of God overshadowed Mary — caused the baby to be born. And therefore Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, in a very real, tangible sense. The term relates to time. The term relates to Incarnation.

Scriptures: John 3:16

Thomas's confession — what Son of God ultimately means

• But let me summarize this, by showing you: the term Son of God relates to the Incarnation. Of course, we have 1 Timothy (the verse as he gives it), which says: God was manifest in the flesh. But more specifically, in John chapter 20: after Jesus arose from the dead, and appeared to his disciples. And then Thomas wasn't there, and didn't believe. So Jesus appeared a second time, to the disciples, with Thomas present. Showed himself to be real, raised from the dead. Thomas answered — this classic statement, in John (the verse as he gives it). And Thomas answered, and said to him: my Lord, and my God. He recognized. Now, Thomas is a Jew, who believed Deuteronomy (the verse as he gives it): hear, o Israel ('here o Israel', as heard), the Lord our God is one Lord. So when he said: you are my Lord, and you are my God — literally, in the Greek, the way the possessive is constructed: the Lord of me. The god of me. Not just a lord. Not just my person God, on the side. But the one Lord, of Deuteronomy (the verse in its split form, as he repeats it). The one God, of Deuteronomy. That's who you are. And of course Jesus accepted that. Said he was blessed. And pronounced a blessing, on everyone else who would believe the same thing, even though they hadn't seen him. So that's us. So Jesus commended that. And commended us, if we believe the same. Verse 29 (as he numbers it). And then verse 30: Jesus did many other signs. And then the writer John, under the inspiration of the spirit, summarizes the whole thing, in verse 31. But these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ. That's the Messiah. The anointed king, prophesied from the Old Testament. That you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the son of God. And that believing, you may have life in his name. So when Thomas confessed Jesus — standing before him, in the flesh, the resurrected body: you are God — John says: I wrote all this, to prove that Jesus is the son of God. So, by saying that, John is not saying: oh, a lesser deity ('oh a lesser de', as the sentence clips). He's saying: the god that appeared to Thomas, in the flesh, is called the Son of God. So the ultimate meaning of Son of God is: truly the one God, who has come in human identity, as the Lord Jesus Christ.

Scriptures: 1 Timothy 3:16; John 20:28; John 20:31; Deuteronomy 6:4

Scripture index: Colossians 2:9; Luke 1:35; Galatians 4:4; Hebrews 1; Psalms (book-only); John 3:16; 1 Timothy 3:16; John 20:28; John 20:31; Deuteronomy 6:4.