Only begotten

The word “only begotten” is translated from the Greek μονογενής (monogenés). The word was used nine times in the New Testament – three times by Luke for a child who have no siblings (Luke 7:12; 8:42; 9:38), five times by Apostle John in relation to our Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9), and once by Apostle Paul in relation to Isaac (Heb. 11:17).

In most of the English versions of the Bible, the word used by the translators is “only begotten.” But in some modern versions like the NIV, NLT, BSB, NASB, GNT, ESV, ISV, NET, monogenés is translated as “one and only son,” “only son,” “unique son,” or “one and only.” The NASB still had “only begotten Son” in John 3:16 in its 1995 edition. But in its 2020 edition, it was changed to “only Son.” The problem posed to any Christian is the determining which of these versions he should accept as the one having the correct English interpretation of monogenés.

Ever since the King James Bible became the notable version used by most English readers, especially among Protestant churches, including Evangelicals and Pentecostals, the orthodox belief is that Jesus Christ is the only begotten son of God, the only one He generated or brought forth out of Himself directly.  We have known that the “begettal” of the Son was different from the procreation of humans through the sexual union of a male and female. But modern Bible scholars are now saying that the word “begotten” was an erroneous translation of the word monogenésused by John.

According to them, the word μονογενής (monogenés) is a Greek adjective having two parts, μονο (mono), meaning “only” and  γενής (genés). The scholars argue that the second part is derived from the root word  γένος (genos), meaning “class,” “kind,” “one of a kind,” or “unique,” which does not have the notion of begetting or derivation by birth. The word γεννάω (gennaō), meaning “beget,” or “bear,” is said not to be a correct root for  μονογενής (monogenés). They said that, whereas genos has one v (pronounced nu),  gennaō has two vv (two nu’s). It is instructive to note that the Nicene Fathers used γεννάω (gennaō) twice in the Nicene Creed of AD 325. Did these men, who read and wrote Greek not know the correct meaning of monogenés? That question is beyond the scope of this article. But it need be said that the fourth century church fathers did much havoc to the doctrine of the Bible. There are many false theories they can be charged with. But here is one, for example. They said that while Jesus was on the earth, he was both God and man dwelling in one body simultaneously (Athanasian Creed, Lines 30-37). They went on to teach that as touching Christ’s Godhead [Godhood], he was equal to the Father, but inferior to the Father, having respect to his manhood (Line 33). How could Jesus Christ have been equal to the Father and be inferior to Him at the same time? This is a teaching of absurdity, not an explanation of the Bible.

Here are other findings I made on the subject under discussion:

1. In the first Latin translations of the Greek New Testament, the word unicus meaning “sole,” “single,” or “unique” is used in all the nine places where monogenés is found. It was Jerome who changed unicus to unigenitus (only begotten) in his Biblia Vulgata published in AD 405. He did it perhaps to counter what Trinitarians term the Arian heresy.
2. The scholarly argument against “only begotten” as an interpretation of monogenés did not start today. It has been found that as far back as 1883, Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1901), an Anglican, who became the Bishop of the Diocese of Durham (1890-1901), published his Commentary on the Epistles of St. John in which he wrote that “unique,” rather than “only begotten” should be the interpretation of monogenés. Other publications which disagreed with the “only begotten” interpretation followed Westcott’s until, eventually, the Revised Standard Version (RSV) in 1946 changed “only begotten” to ”only” in the five Johannine verses. Other modern English versions followed. The translators of the New American Standard Bible (NASB), the version held as having the most accurate interpretation of the Bible, has recently done the same in their 2020 edition.
3. The translators of the New English Translation (NET) Bible made a footnote to John 3:16, which includes the following: “Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clement 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant. 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God (τέκνα θεοῦ, tekna qeou), Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).”
4. Monogenés also occurs a few times in the Septuagint (or LXX), the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, written from the third through the first centuries BCE. In Judges 11:34 it is used for Jephthah’s daughter, an only child.  And it occurs in Tobit 3:15 which says, “… I am my father’s only child; he has no other child to be his heir …” It is also used three times in the Psalms, obviously with the senses of “only” and “alone”: “only life” in Psa. 22:20 (LXX 21:21), “alone” in Psa. 25:16 (LXX 24:16), and “only life” in Psa. 35:17 (LXX 34:17).
5. In the five places where the word us used of a child’s relationship with the father or mother (Judg. 11:34; Tobit 3:15; Luke 7:12; 9:38; 8:42), the sense has been that of being an only child, having no siblings. The sense of being produced by birth, which is normal for all humans, is not in focus in all of them. This might have been the same sense in which Apostle John called Jesus the “monogenés huios,” the only son of God, who has no siblings. However, the fact that God has other sons – angels and humans – who  are His sons by creation, Jesus’s sonship must be of a different type.(cf. John 20:17). What makes his own sonship unique is not expressly spelt out in the Bible. The Byzantine fathers who formulated the Trinitarian dogma only surmised that it was the fact that God begot him. They could be right. But there is no explicit biblical warrant for this. The uniqueness of Christ might have been due to the fact that he is the only one that God granted  His own divinity (cf. John 5:26; Col. 2:9). If this is true, the begetting of the Son by the Father cannot be ruled out as what John had in mind when he wrote monogenés; Christ’s divinity will point in only one direction, that of the Son being brought out of the very person of God Himself. The divine law of God is that everything produce their own kind (Gen. 1:11, 12, 21, 24, 25, etc.). Spirit begets spirit (John 3:6). The Godhood of the Son of God means no more than the fact that God brought him forth out of Himself. This begettal is not the same as human procreation that requires a sexual union of a male and a female. Therefore, it should never be thought of as a sexual union between God and the virgin named Myriam. The Son was begotten before the creation of the universe (John 1:1-3; Heb.1:2; Col. 1:16). His begettal took place long before his incarnation, when his divinity was temporarily suspended by God and was born as a human being. He pre-existed his supernatural conception and birth by Myriam.
6. The Bible has revealed that the angels of God also called “sons of God” (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7). The first human, Adam, has also been called the “son of God” (Luke 3:38). The phrase “sons of God” is used six times in the New Testament in relation to believers in Christ (John 1:12; Rom. 8:14, 19; Phil. 2:15; 1 John 3:1-2). Angels and Adam are sons of God because they derived their lives directly from God. We, the believers in Christ, are adopted into God’s family through His Son Jesus Christ. That’s what entitled us to be called the sons of God. It is biblically clear that our Lord Jesus Christ is not the only Son of God. The use of “only Son” by some translators is misleading. They need to immediately revisit their use of that phrase.

Was Jesus Not Birthed By God?

Besides the verses in which the Lord Jesus Christ is called the monogenés, is there a single biblical text in which Jesus is called the begotten son of God? Yes, there is. It is found in the Messianic Psalm 2. Verses 1-7 reads:

Psalms 2:1-7 NKJV

[1] “Why do the nations rage, And the people plot a vain thing? [2] The kings of the earth set themselves, And the rulers take counsel together, Against the Lord and against His Anointed, saying, [3] “Let us break Their bonds in pieces And cast away Their cords from us.” [4] He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; The Lord shall hold them in derision. [5] Then He shall speak to them in His wrath, And distress them in His deep displeasure: [6] “Yet I have set My King On My holy hill of Zion.” [7] “I will declare the decree: The Lord has said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.”

Some scholars and commentators have said the anointed king (v. 2) is a reference to David(1 Sam.16:12-13) or Solomon (2 Sam. 7:12-15). But the apostles have clearly stated that Psalm 2 refers exclusively to the Messiah Jesus. See Acts 4:25-27.

In the original Hebrew text, the word translated “begotten” is יָלַד (yalad). In the Septuagint (or LXX), the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, the Greek word used is γεγέννηκά (gegennēka). Both the Hebrew and Greek words mean the same thing. They mean to bear, bring forth, bear (of child birth), beget, gender, travail, procreate. See Strong’s Hebrew Lexicon #3205 and Greek  #1080, as well as Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Definitions #3542. There in Psalm 2 lies the clear proof that our Lord Jesus Christ was begotten by God. God brought him forth out of Himself, not through any carnal union with any other person, but supernaturally out of Himself. Apostle Paul made reference to the begettal of Jesus Christ three times (Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:5; 5:5). In the three places, he used the Greek word γεγέννηκά (gegennēka) which was exactly the same word used in Psa. 2:7 (LXX). The idea that our Lord Jesus Christ was the begotten Son of God was not strange to the apostles. With this in mind, the argument that the etymology of μονογενής (monogenés) forbids the notion of begottenness is inconsequential as far as the five Johannine verses, in which Jesus is called the begotten Son of God, are concerned.

A Few Dissenting Voices

There are still some scholars who have disagreed with the “one and only Son” or the “one-of -a-kind Son” definition of monogenés by the modern translators. One of them is Charles Lee Irons (PhD in New Testament Studies) who published in 2017 an essay captioned ‘A Lexical Defense of the Johannine “Only Begotten.”’ In it, Irons wrote that he found “at least 145” words in ancient Greek that are built on the genés suffix of monogenés. He wrotethat the largest number of them have the idea of being born or produced.

In an online article with the title ‘Monogenés: “Only  Begotten” or “One of a Kind,”?’ written by Larry G. Brigden, and published by Christian Study Library, he took the same position as  Charles Lee Irons. In his argument, which was evidently in defence of Trinitarianism, he advanced a number of points against the “one and only Son” or “only Son” renderings in our modern versions. Two of the points raised by him are quoted here:

“Secondly, the claim that the γενης ending of μονογενης is to be derived from γενος, with the meaning ‘class’, ‘sort’, ‘kind’, may be tested by examining the meaning of the γενης ending in similar Greek adjectives which also have the same two-part structure. The following is a list of such adjectives:”

He then gave the list, with my additions in square brackets:

Αγεηνς [agenḗs]: not of noble birth; low born

Αγεννης [agennḗs]: low born

δῠσγενής [dusgenḗs]: lowborn, lowly born

ευγενης [eugenḗs]: well born, high born

ομογενης [omogenes]: related, of the same race or family, akin.

πολυγενης [paliggenesia]: to be born again, generated anew

πολυγενης [paliggenesia]: of many families

προγενης [progenes]: born before

πρωτογενης [prōtogenēs]: firstborn.

συγγενης [syngeneís] related, akin.

Having supplied the sample words, Brigden then drove the point home by writing: “It may be observed that in all these words the concept of ‘begetting’ or ‘derivation by birth’ is clearly present. So how may it be confidently asserted that μονογενης does not contain the concept of ‘begetting’? The assertion does not appear to be confirmed by objective evidence. On the contrary, the evidence indicates that the concept of ‘begetting’ or ‘derivation by birth’ certainly can be conveyed by the γενης ending. It is therefore entirely possible that μονογενης means ‘only begotten’.”

He made another point by writing, “From this examination of the two etymologies for μονογενης, it may be concluded that the meaning ‘only begotten’ is entirely possible. Certainly there are no grounds for summarily dismissing that meaning as is often done. On the other hand, the etymology of μονογενης which insists on deriving the γενης ending from γενος and then arbitrarily restricts the possible meanings of γενος within a narrow range, though those same meanings are not applied to other similar Greek words, cannot be considered an impartial or scientific etymology.”

Abraham’s Son, Isaac

The author of the Book of Hebrews wrote:  

Hebrews 11:17-19 NKJV

[17] “By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,  [18] of whom it was said, “In Isaac your seed shall be called,” [19] concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead, from which he also received him in a figurative sense.”

Some Bible scholars and commentators have argued that since Isaac was not the only biological son of Abraham, the word μονογενής (monogenés) cannot be rightly interpreted as “only begotten.”  They conclude that the better interpretation should be “one and only,” that is, of a different class, or “unique.” But it seems that all those who argue against the begottenness of the Son are driven more by some theological preference than an honest desire to know and teach biblical truth.

Why did Paul use the word μονογενής (monogenés) for Isaac when he knew that he was not the only begotten son of Abraham? The truth is not farfetched. As at the time God tested Abraham (Gen. 22), Ishmael and his mother had been sent away with God’s approval (Gen. 21:8-14). All that were left in Abraham’s house were his only begotten son, Isaac, and the sons of his bought slaves. According to the law, these sons were Abraham’s sons. But they were not his biological or begotten sons. See Exod. 21:2-6; Gen. 17:23-27; 14:14-16; 15:1-4. That was why God had to be specific as to which of these sons Abraham was to offer up as sacrifice. Not to create any doubt in the mind of Abraham, God said, “Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.” (Gen. 22:2 NKJV).

So, as at the time Abraham was tested by God, Abraham had only one son, Isaac, whom he gave birth to. All the other sons in his house were, technically, his sons. But they were not his begotten sons. Apostle Paul was perfectly right when he wrote in Heb. 11:17 that Isaac was the only begotten son of Abraham. In this instance, the sons of Abraham’s slaves, who were legally his sons, were in view when Paul was writing Heb. 11:17-18. Ishmael had been sent away, making Isaac the only begotten son that Abraham would have offered up as sacrifice. Paul couldn’t have written that  Isaac was the “one and only” son of  Abraham. After Sarah’s death, Abraham married another woman named Keturah, through whom he had other sons (Gen. 25:1-2). All these were born after Abraham had been tested by God. In summary, the only begotten son Abraham had with him as at the time he was tested by God was Isaac.

Conclusion

Even if all Christians should believe this moment that  μονογενής (monogenés) does not have the notion of begottenness, it still does not obliterate the fact that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God. We cannot fault the scriptures which say he was begotten, as written in Psa. 2:7 (Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:5; 5:5). God Himself is the one who said He gave birth to His Son. In Psa. 2:1-7, the Son is no other person than the Messiah. Acts 4:25-27 removes all doubt that Jesus Christ is the one. His begottenness makes him an offspring of God – someone that has a beginning. But his beginning was before the creation of the universe. It is apparent from Job 38:4-7 that even the angels, also known as “morning stars” and “sons of God,” were also already in existence when the universe was created. That Jesus is called God in some  places does not make him ”the only God,” as rendered by the ESV in John 1:18. Would the ESV say the Devil and humans are also “the one God” by the mere fact that they are also called Gods in the Bible? It is instructive to note that in Psa. 45:6-7 where the Psalmist called the Son God is the very place where he said that YHWH, the one and only Supreme, self-existent Being called God, is his God. The Psalmist therefore meant that the Godhood of the Son is derived from YHWH, the one God. So, we can confidently say that the Son is a begotten God. The one God is not any other being than the Almighty YHWH (LORD in the Englush versions). He is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (John 20:17; 2 Cor. 11:31; Eph. 1:3, 17; Col. 1:3; 1 Pet. 1:3; Rev. 3:12). Our Lord Jesus Christ has never been coequal or coeternal with his God and Father, as theorised in the Trinitarian Creeds.

One problem that has plagued theology is that we have dissipated so much time in arguing about particular words, phrases or verses while we remain oblivious to other parts of the Bible that teach and, probably, sheds the light we need on the same subject. So I ask, if μονογενής (monogenés) does not prove that Jesus was begotten by God, has the use of γεγέννηκά (gegennēka) in relation to him not shown that he was indeed begotten of God? The Trinitarians try to escape the truth by saying that Psalm 2 is a reference to King David by citing 1 Sam. 16:12-13. Others say it is a reference to Solomon because God said “I will be a Father to him and he will be my son” (2 Sam. 7:14). But God also said concerning Solomon, “when he does wrong, I will discipline him with a rod of men and with strokes of sons of mankind…” This could not have been said of the Anointed (Messiah or Christ), the one to whom it was said, ”you have loved righteousness and hated wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions” (Psa. 45:7 ESV). More specifically, the apostles understood Psalm 2 as a prophecy about our Lord Jesus Christ. They declared this in Acts 4:25-27.

The debate about the etymology of μονογενής (monogenés) is totally insignificant because it does not obliterate the biblical fact that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God. When he was begotten of the Father is another discussion for another time.