Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
| PentecostalTheology.com
I was reading my New King James version of the Bible and found a footnote for this verse:
John 1:18 (NKJV)
No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son,[a] who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.
The footnote (found on the online version as well) says that another translation of this verse is “the only begotten God.”
It seems that “son” and “god” are two very different words. Why was this footnote added? Was the original language showing “son” or “god”?
Anonymous
Moulton-Milligan – Monogenes is literally “one of a kind,” “only,” “unique” (unicus), not “only-begotten,” which would be monogennetos. Monogenes is applied in a special sense to Christ in Jn 1:14, 18, 3:16, 18, 1Jn 4:9, where the emphasis is on the thought that, as the “only” Son of God, He has no equal and is able fully to reveal the Father.
Anonymous
John Mushenhouse I am pretty BIG on this one cause it is important What is your greek read on this? I am afraid to ask Link the same less we end up with a gnostic translation Duane L Burgess will bid as heretical…
Anonymous
Troy Day From all I have seen – unique – one of a kind literally
Anonymous
John Mushenhouse mono – one
genos – origin, genesis, gene
mono-genos => of the same/one genetics?
This is NOT involving any gnosticism here Link Hudson
Anonymous
Troy Day yes one kind – unique
Anonymous
John Mushenhouse well ONE one kind – unique does not do it for me
of the same genetics – essence is the early Church definition
we cannot forget to mention its not just mono-genon but FIRST born too
As in mono-gennon first-born which kills HEIZERS theory about 2 YHWHs and multiple sonS of GOD YHWH – a theory Ricky Grimsley Philip Williams Link Hudson hold SO dearly and heartly to their Phrenology – Phrenology is a process that involves observing and/or feeling the skull to determine an individual’s psychological attributes. Franz Joseph Gall believed that
Anonymous
I like unique because it separates Him from all others although I can see what you are saying. I see unique fitting in with John 1:1-18
Anonymous
Troy Day the uniquely born one. The word (God) became flesh so he can do an exegesis of God to the world. John 1:1-18
Anonymous
John Mushenhouse well Ricky Grimsley thinks he was NOT eternal son and Link Hudson fancies in a 2nd YHWH but none of them is monogenon first born https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/divine-council-of-el-elyon-second-yhwh-and-elohims-gods/
Anonymous
No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
LSB
Anonymous
monogenés: only begotten
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/1-18.htm
Anonymous
Q plays NO role here John Mushenhouse Link Hudson Jerome Herrick Weymouth
Anonymous
oh yes Duane L Burgess your BibleHub reference really explains NOTHING here This one aint as easy as going to the interlinear genesis VS begotton #goodLuck
Anonymous
Troy Day Q plays no part in legit bible study.
Anonymous
Isara Mo Nope. God cannot be “begotten”. – are you sure about this/>
Robert Yarbrough – Recent translations correctly reflect that Jesus’ status as “only begotten” underscores his uniqueness rather than his place or mode of origin—it does not directly refer to his virgin birth. Both as unrivaled expression of the Father’s glory and as distinct from any created human, he holds preeminence (Colossians 1:18). He is monogenes [Psalm 2:7; Acts 13:33), while “only” left room for affirmation of his divine nature. Through the Vulgate’s influence on early English versions of the Bible, the traditional translation “only begotten” still rings true for many today.
Moulton-Milligan – Monogenes is literally “one of a kind,” “only,” “unique” (unicus), not “only-begotten,” which would be monogennetos. Monogenes is applied in a special sense to Christ in Jn 1:14, 18, 3:16, 18, 1Jn 4:9, where the emphasis is on the thought that, as the “only” Son of God, He has no equal and is able fully to reveal the Father.
Only begotten (One of a Kind, One and Only) (3439)(monogenes from monos = alone + genos = birth, race, kind <> from ginomai = to come into being, to become) means that which is the only one of its kind of class or specific relationship and thus is unique or “one and only.”
The only begotten (monogenes) – Most modern scholars agree that monogenes does not refer to the “begetting” aspect of Jesus’ sonship, but rather to His uniqueness. As explained below NET Bible favors the translation “of the one and only.” ESV = “the only Son”, NIV = “the One and Only,” NLT, HCSB = “the One and Only Son” ESV Study Bible note – The Greek word underlying “only,” monogenes, means “one of a kind, unique,” as in the case of Isaac, who is called Abraham’s “one-of-a-kind” son in Heb. 11:17 (in contrast to Ishmael; cf. Ge 22:2, 12, 16). Thus “only” is a better translation than “only begotten” (made familiar through its use in the kjv).
Anonymous
Jesus exegetes the invisible God (John 14:6 he who has seen me as seen the Father) — how is that done? –Phillips: it is true that no one has ever seen God at any time. Yet the divine and only Son, who lives in the closest intimacy with the Father, has made him known.—————or Wuest: Absolute deity in its essence no one has ever yet seen. God uniquely-begotten, He who is in the bosom of the Father, that One fully explained deity.— One reason no one had seen the essence of God was that to do so would have brought instant death (Ex. 33:20; Ge. 32:30; Dt. 5:26; Jdg. 13:22)— we must let the bible interpret the bible here, but there is a good case based on textual criticism for the only begotten. Plus you can tell KJV only folks that the KJV also takes away the deity of Jesus. — Steven Cole sums the arguments up by noting that “The earliest and best manuscripts favor the reading “only begotten God.” Since it is a unique phrase and is more difficult to explain than “only begotten Son,” a scribe probably changed the original to “only begotten Son” to correspond to John 3:16 & 18. Thus translated literally, the verse in the original probably read, “the unique Son, God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.” As Jesus will later say (6:46), “Not that anyone has seen the Father, except the One who is from God; He has seen the Father.” And (14:9), “He who has seen Me has seen the Father.”— From the Net bible
Anonymous
Troy Day
Yes very definite: God cannot be begotten .The Son yes, and makes sense and is clearly understood .
Human translations whether in Greek or English or Kiswahili will remain just that human translations .
The scripture states categorically in John 1:14 “and the WORD was made flesh..not GOD was made flesh ” or the Spirit was made flesh nor the Father became flesh.
In his discourse with the Samaritan woman Jesus refers o God as Spirit ..and the Father .
Before His earthly departure Jesus told his disciples “I’m going to my Father who is your father ,my God who is your God..’
Jesus deity (John 1:1_3, Col 1:15,Hebrews 1:1_5,Philipians 2:5_9,Rev 5: 1_9)….always depicts a relational deity between Son &Father ..yet it remains true that the Son is the manifested form of God and the Father the eternal unmanifest Spirit who can never be begotten..
So who was speaking from heaven the day Jesus was baptized in the Jordan saying “This is my beloved Son…in whom I am pleased?
Let’s not try to twist the scriptures to fit our thinking .Rather let’s let the scriptures twist our thinking ..it is healthy
Anonymous
in this case Isara Mo you need to explain to John Mushenhouse Duane L Burgess HOW is that Ricky Grimsley believes the Word was not a Son before it was GOD begotten …