I am not disagreeing with this.
I am disagreeing that until The physical body of Jesus walked the earth we never heard anyone call anyone the son or the father.
We were toldThere was God YHWH, The Holy Spirit, and the Word.
We know they make up the Godhead.
We know that about 2000 years ago the Word became Jesus. AND then was called the son. Because Mary was told to call Him that because he was the Savior and it meant that.
We know that Jesus had a physical mom. He also had the Holy Spirit , who made Mary pregnant. (I dont know and I dont care)
We know that somehow the Word became that baby who grew into a man who was the savior and now He is Christ Jesus.
We know this because John 1 said In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God.
We know this how? John again John 1:14 John 1:14 in the King James Version states, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."
So the Word was always. As was God YHWH and the Holy Spirit.
But it is the begotten one needs to look at.
Do you remember all those begats in the bible? They were there to show lineages and bloodlines.
do you know begat and begotten are related? Both derive from the verb "beget," which means to bring a child into existence. "Begotten" is the past participle form, while "begat" is the simple past tense.
The meaning of the word 'begotten' in the Bible, including in John 1:18, John 3:16, Psalm 2:7, Acts 13:33, Hebrews 1:5, Hebrews 5:5, Hebrews 11:17, and 1 John 4:9. As you can see, the original Greek words are different.
www.bibleversestudy.com
ACTS 13: 33 God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm:
‘You are My Son, today I have begotten You.’
(Reread that, please. You are My Son, TODAY I have begotten you.
Its important because He could easily have said You were begotten from before time but today
I am publicly acknowledging you or something like that but He said TODAY I have begotten you
meaning Jesus became the son not from the very beginning... And if the Word was the intended here then becoming the Son part was not from before time.)
back to the link
What is the meaning of "have begotten" (Acts 13:33)?
γεγεννηκα (gegenneka), the original Greek word translated "have begotten," is typically understood to mean "having fathered" or "having brought forth from the womb," but it literally means just "having brought forth" or "having caused to arise," and is being used in this literal sense in this passage (see below). It should thebe noted that γεγεννηκα (gegenneka) is different from μονογενης
(monogenes), which means “only” or “unique” but mistranslated as “only begotten” in some English translations (see
monogenes).
So Jesus was begotten. Mary was the mom and the Holy Spirit the reason Jesus could be born.
So I am still firm in my belief that yes... the Trinity always was. Elohim, the Word, and the Holy Spirit
But later on... in Yahweh's perfect timing, to fulfill His perfect plans that he laid out long before the Spirit was hovering over the waters his only Begotten Son came to be.
Now, I have no idea how the scribes wrote what they did in certain instances. We are told they were inspired. But also
I recently read where they relied also on some word of mouth things passed down.
We are relying on the translations... and as you have seen thee are many of those all slightly different.
So bless you civic for your firm beliefs. Most of which I am 100% with, but I will be at odds on this one.
Mono-genes Kittle
"only-begotten [Mono-genes]
Usage outside the New Testament: In compounds like [Greek] suggests derivation [Greek] rather than birth. Nouns as the first part of the compound give the source, e.g., from Zeus, the earth. Adverbs describe the nature of the derivation, e.g., noble or common. Mono-genes is to be explained along the lines [Greek], rather than [Greek]. The genes does not denote the source (footnote: "Deriving from one alone" would be meaningless) but the nature of derivation. Hence Mono-genes, means "of sole descent," i.e., without brothers or sisters. This gives us the sense of only-begotten. The ref. is to the only child of one's parents, primarily in relation to them. Mono-genes is stronger than [Greek], for it denotes that they have never had more than this child. But the word can also be used more generally without ref. to derivation in the sense of "unique," "unparalleled," "incomparable,"
B. The Use in the New Testament: 1. In the NT Mono-genes occurs only in Lk, Jn. and Hb., not Mk., Mt. or Pl. It is thus found only in later writings. It means "only-begotten." Thus in Hb. Isaac is the Mono-genes, of Abraham (11:17), in Lk. the dead man raised up again at Nain is the only son of his mother (7:12). the daughter of Jairus is the only child (8:42), and the demoniac boy is the only son of his father (8:42). 2. Only Jn. uses Mono-genes, to describe the relation of Jesus to God. Mk. ... The further step taken by Jn. to describe Jesus corresponds to the fact that believers who as children of God are called [Greek] the same word as is applied to Jesus - in Mt., Pl. etc., are always called [Greek] in Jn., 1:12; 11:52; 1 Jn.3:1, 2, 10; 5:2, while [Greek] is reserved for Jesus. Jn. emphasizes more strongly the distinction between Jesus and believers and the uniqueness of Jesus in His divine sonship. It is not that Jesus is not unique in this sonship for Mt., Pl. etc. also. His Messiah-ship proves this. But Jn. puts it in an illuminating and easily remembered formula which was taken up into the baptismal confession and which ever since has formed an inalienable part of the creed of the Church. To Mono-genes, as a designation of Jesus corresponds the fact that God is the [Greek], of Jesus, Jn. 5:18; for [Greek], means to be in a special relation to Jesus which excludes the same relation to others. Mono-genes occurs in Jn. 1:14,18; 3:16,18; 1 Jn. 4:9. What is meant is plainest in Jn. 3:16 and I Jn. 4:9. Because Jesus is the only Son of God, His sending into the world is the supreme proof of God's love for the world. On the other side, it is only as the only-begotten Son of God that Jesus can mediate life and salvation from perdition. For life is given only in Him, Jn. 5:26. But the fact that He is the only-begotten Son means also that men are obligated to believe in Him, and that they come under judgment, indeed, have done so already, if they withhold faith from Him, 3:18. Mono-genes is thus a predicate of majesty. This is true in Jn. 1:18. Here we are to read [Greek]. 14 As the only-begotten Son Jesus is in the closest intimacy with God. There is no other with whom God can have similar fellowship. He shares everything with this Son. For this reason Jesus can give what no man can give, namely, the fullest possible eye-witness account of God. He knows God, not just from hearsay, but from incomparably close intercourse with Him. In 3:16, 18; 1 Jn. 4:9; 1: 18 the relation of Jesus is not just compared to that of an only child to its father. It is the relation of the only-begotten to the Father. Similarly in Jn. 1:14: [Greek], His glory is not just compared with that of an only child; it is described as that of the only-begotten Son. Grammatically both interpretations are justifiable. But the total usage of Mono-genes is very emphatically against taking [Greek] Mono-genes as a mere comparison. In Jn. 1: 14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 Jn. 4:9 Mono-genes denotes more than the uniqueness or Incomparability of Jesus. In all these verses He is expressly called the Son, and He is regarded as such in 1-14. In Jn. Mono-genes denotes the origin of Jesus. He is Mono-genes, as the only-begotten. What Jn. means by [Greek] Mono-genes [Greek] in detail can be known in its full import only in the light of the whole of John's proclamation. For [Greek] is simply a special form of [Greek] Mono-genes [Greek]. When Jn. speaks of the Son of God, he has primarily in view the man Jesus Christ, though not exclusively the man, but also the risen and pre-existent Lord. The relation of the pre-existent Lord to God is that of Son to Father. This comes out Indisputably in 17:5, 24. Jesus is aware that He was with God, and was loved by Him, and endued with glory, before the foundation of the world. This is personal fellowship with God, divine sonship. It is true that neither In the prologue, nor 8:58, nor c. 17 does Jn. use the term "son" for the pre-existent Lord. But He describes His relation to God as that of a son. To maintain that in Jn. the pre-existent Lord is only the Word, and that the Son is only the historical and risen Lord, is to draw too sharp a line between the pre-existence on the one side and the historical and post-historical life on the other. In Jn. the Lord is always the Son. Because He alone was God's Son before the foundation of the world, because the whole love of the Father is for Him alone, because He alone is one with God, because the title God may be ascribed to Him alone, He is the only-begotten Son of God. (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament", Gerhard Kittel, Buchsel, 1967, Vol. IV, p 737-741)
MONOGENÊS
BAGD: "In the Johannine lit[erature] m[onogenês] is used only of Jesus. The mngs. only, unique may be quite adequate for all its occurrences here...But some (e.g., WBauer, Hdb.) prefer to regard m[onogenês] as somewhat heightened in mng. in J and 1J to only-begotten or begotten of the Only One." (Bauer, it will be remembered, believed the Gospel of John was a gnostic text, and hence saw a theology behind John's writing compatible with the creation of the Logos as a semi-divine intermediary between the Monas and the creation with which He could not directly interact).
Louw & Nida: "Pertaining to what is unique in the sense of being the only one of the same kind or class - 'unique, only.'"
Moulton & Milligan: "Literally 'one of a kind,' 'only,' 'unique' (unicus), not 'only-begotten....'"
Grimm/Thayer: "Single of its kind, only, [A.V. only-begotten]." (Note that Thayer's insertion merely cites the KJV translation, which owes considerable debt to the Vulgate of Jerome, who translated
monogenês "unigenitus").
NIDNTT: "The only begotten, or only....RSV and NEB render
monogenês as 'only.' This meaning is supported by R. E. Brown, The Gospel According to John, Anchor Bible, I, 1966, 13 f., and D. Moody, “God’s Only Son: The Translation of John 3:16 in the Revised Standard Version,” JBL 72, 1953, 213-19. Lit. it means “of a single kind,” and could even be used in this sense of the Phoenix (1 Clem. 25:2). It is only distantly related to gennao, beget. The idea of “only begotten” goes back to Jerome who used unigenitus in the Vulg. to counter the Arian claim that Jesus was not begotten but made."
Newman: "Unique, only."
LSJ: "Only, single" (references John 1:14, the only NT verse cited).
TDNT: defines
monogenês as "only begotten," but distinguishes between nouns ending in -genes and adverbs ending in -genês. The former denote the source of the derivation, the latter the nature of the derivation. Thus, the author (Buchsel) concludes that
monogenêsmeans "of sole descent." But Pendrick argues strongly against this view:
monogenes (monogenh/$,
NT:3439) is used five times, all in the writings of the apostle John, of Christ as the Son of God; it is translated "only begotten" in
Heb 11:17 of the relationship of Isaac to Abraham.
With reference to Christ, the phrase "the only begotten from the Father,"
John 1:14, RV (see also the marg.), indicates that as the Son of God He was the sole representative of the Being and character of the One who sent Him. 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. The apostle's object is to demonstrate what sort of glory it was that he and his fellow apostles had seen. That he is not merely making a comparison with earthly relationships is indicated by
para, "from." The glory was that of a unique relationship and the word "begotten" does not imply a beginning of His Sonship. It suggests relationship indeed, but must be distinguished from generation as applied to man.
We can only rightly understand the term "the only begotten" when used of the Son, in the sense of unoriginated relationship. "The begetting is not an event of
time, however remote, but a fact irrespective of time. The Christ did not become, but necessarily and eternally is the Son. He, a Person, possesses every attribute of pure Godhood. This necessitates eternity, absolute being; in this respect He is not 'after' the Father" (Moule). The expression also suggests the thought of the deepest affection, as in the case of the OT word yachid, variously rendered, "only one,"
Gen 22:2,12; "only son,"
Jer 6:26; Amos 8:10; Zech 12:10; "only beloved,"
Prov 4:3, and "darling,"
Ps 22:20; 35:17.
In
John 1:18 the clause "the only begotten son, which is in the bosom of the Father," expresses both His eternal union with the Father in the Godhead and the ineffable intimacy and love between them, the Son sharing all the Father's counsels and enjoying all His affections. Another reading is
monogenes Theos, "God only-begotten." In
John 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. The value and the greatness of the gift lay in the Sonship of Him who was given. His Sonship was not the effect of His being given. In
John 3:18 the phrase "the name of the only begotten son of God" lays stress upon the full revelation of God's character and will, His love and grace, as conveyed in the name of One who, being in a unique relationship to Him, was provided by Him as the object of faith. In
1 John 4:9 the statement "God hath sent His only begotten son into the world" does not mean that God sent out into the world one who at His birth in Bethlehem had become His Son. Cf. the parallel statement, "God sent forth the Spirit of His Son,"
Gal 4:6, RV, which could not mean that God sent forth One who became His Spirit when He sent Him. (from Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Copyright © 1985, Thomas Nelson Publishers.)
Vincent Greek NT
The only begotten son (ὁ μονογενὴς υἱὸς)
Several of the principal manuscripts and a great mass of ancient evidence support the reading μονογενὴς Θεὸς, "God only begotten."
Another and minor difference in reading relates to the article, which is omitted from μονογενὴς by most of the authorities which favor Θεὸς. Whether we read the only begotten Son, or God only begotten, the sense of the passage is not affected. The latter reading merely combines in one phrase the two attributes of the word already indicated - God (
John 1:1), only begotten (
John 1:14); the sense being one who was both God and only begotten.
Who is in the bosom (ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον)
The expression ὁ ὢν, who is, or the one being, is explained in two ways: 1. As a timeless present, expressing the inherent and eternal relation of the Son to the Father. 2. As interpreted by the preposition. εἰς, in, literally, into, and expressing the fact of Christ's return to the Father's glory after His incarnation: "The Son who has entered into the Father's bosom and is there." In the former case it is an absolute description of the nature of the Son: in the latter, the emphasis is on the historic fact of the ascension, though with a reference to his eternal abiding with the Father from thenceforth.
While the fact of Christ's return to the Father's glory may have been present to the writer's mind, and have helped to determine the form of the statement, to emphasize that fact in this connection would seem less consistent with the course of thought in the Prologue than the other interpretation: since John is declaring in this sentence the competency of the incarnate Son to manifest God to mankind. The ascension of Christ is indeed bound up with that truth, but is not, in the light of the previous course of thought, its primary factor. That is rather the eternal oneness of the Word with God; which, though passing through the phase of incarnation, nevertheless remains unbroken (
John 3:13). Thus Godet, aptly: "The quality attributed to Jesus, of being the perfect revealer of the divine Being, is founded on His intimate and perfect relation to God Himself."
The phrase, in the bosom of the Father, depicts this eternal relation as essentially a relation of love; the figure being used of the relation of husband and wife (
Deuteronomy 13:6); of a father to an infant child (
Numbers 11:12), and of the affectionate protection and rest afforded to Lazarus in Paradise (
Luke 16:23). The force of the preposition εἰς, into, according to the first interpretation of who is, is akin to that of "with God" (see on
John 1:1); denoting an ever active relation, an eternal going forth and returning to the Father's bosom by the Son in His eternal work of love. He ever goes forth from that element of grace and love and returns to it. That element is His life. He is there "because He plunges into it by His unceasing action" (Godet).
He (ἐκεῖνος)
Strongly emphatic, and pointing to the eternal Son. This pronoun is used by John more frequently than by any other writer. It occurs seventy-two times, and not only as denoting the more distant subject, but as denoting and laying special stress on the person or thing immediately at hand, or possessing pre-eminently the quality which is immediately in question. Thus Jesus applies it to Himself as the person for whom the healed blind man is inquiring: "It is He (ἐκεῖνος) that talketh with thee" (
John 9:37). So here, "the only-begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father - He hath declared Him."
hope this helps !!!
