Take the 2-minute tour ×
Christianity Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

This question is related to the eternal begetting of the Son NOT his incarnation.

share|improve this question
3  
Why was this question downvoted without explanation? –  gideon marx Nov 2 '13 at 17:33
1  
@gideonmarx presumably because commenting on downvotes isn't required as as been discussed on multiple StackExchange meta sites, including ours. –  David Stratton Nov 3 '13 at 16:39
1  
This question is based on a false premise, which has already been addressed. The Son does not have an origin, the Son is also eternal. See here for instance. –  Flimzy Nov 3 '13 at 20:41
    
I was going to upvote on the grounds that not understanding something doesn't make for a bad question about it, but if you are using terms like "eternal begetting" you presumably do understand. –  DJClayworth Nov 4 '13 at 4:24
    
As Flimzy points out, the Son is eternally co-existent with the Father and Spirit. He did enter into creation about 2,000 years ago, but that is not His origin, as both the Old and New Testaments clearly affirm. God became a man and dwelt among us. The eternal begetting is probably an unfortunate term. There is no biology involved here, nor is there any succession in terms of time. –  Narnian Nov 4 '13 at 14:27
show 1 more comment

5 Answers

John 1:1,14 is the classic proof text of the eternality of the Son.

in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Through Him all things were Made, and by him was nothing made that was made.

John 1:14 goes on to say that this is Jesus.

Furthermore the creeds are very clear that he was begotten not made, which precisely is there to address the whole subordinationism debate. Basically, the creeds work out in more precise detail how it is that the Son is not subordinate to the Father, by nature of his eternal begottenness.

To go too much further would really be to stumble into book territory, which is beyond the scope of the site.

share|improve this answer
    
This answer is great but it does not answer my question at all. I am asking about the begetting of the Son by the Father as said in the Nicene Creed NOT his begetting in Mary. I believe in the incarnation. –  Radz Matthew Co Brown Nov 5 '13 at 10:23
    
The incarnation is about Mary, which I am not addressing (although that would be 14.) the eternal begetting is what 1:1 is about, not incarnation. –  Affable Geek Nov 5 '13 at 11:18
    
You are pointing about the eternal nature of the Son which is your explanation as to why his begetting is not a beginning of existence? If it is, then, your view is correct. –  Radz Matthew Co Brown Nov 6 '13 at 13:06
    
Yes, the incarnation is the putting flesh onto the pre-existant Son. –  Affable Geek Nov 6 '13 at 14:04
add comment

You are confusing the Deity Jesus with the man Jesus.

When the Angel Gabriel announced to the Virgin Mary that she would become Pregnant and bear a son, he told her that she would be overcome by the Holy Spirit.

Luk 1:35 KJV

And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

The Holy Ghost himself placed the seed of God into Mary's womb which combined with Mary's seed then grew into the baby Jesus.

Because Jesus had both the seed of man which he inherited through Mary his mother and the seed of God which the Holy Spirit placed in the womb of his mother Mary, Jesus was both man and God.

This is no different than the fact that you are the son of both your mother and your father, and have characteristics of both of them.

Mat 1:18 KJV

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

Mat 1:20 KJV

But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

That seed from the Holy Ghost is eternal therefore the Deity part of Jesus is also eternal.

share|improve this answer
    
This answer is great and biblical but it does not answer my question at all. I am asking about the begetting of the Son by the Father as said in the Nicene Creed NOT his begetting in Mary. I believe in the incarnation, the Son became human so that he has two natures in his one person ( Chalcedonian Creed). –  Radz Matthew Co Brown Nov 5 '13 at 10:22
add comment

... his Son, with an origin,....

This is one of the classic misconception of Trinity. Jesus is not begotten in a particular point in time by The Father. As you have mentioned Jesus is eternally begotten. That is, in the very nature of God's existence, Jesus was/is/will-be begotten by the Father for eternity. This is same as how holy spirit was/is/will-be proceeding from the father (and the son). That is being eternally begotten is not an event in the past, rather the state of existence (being) of second person of the Trinity in the Trinity.

share|improve this answer
    
I like your answer. It is what I need. –  Radz Matthew Co Brown Nov 5 '13 at 10:19
add comment

The Son truly has an origin or source of his very existence. He is not dependent of himself for existence because he himself is a son. He depends on his Father for existence.

" The Son is auto-theos because of his nature not because of his sonship."

The Son has an origin of existence (i.e. the Father) but does not have a beginning of existence. Someone/something who has an origin can still be co-eval with its source.

Example: A heavy ball is placed on a cushion, there's a depression caused in the cushion. The moment it was placed on the cushion was the exact moment when the depression was caused. Hence, the cause and the effect are coeval.

In the Bible, the Father begets the Son. The cause of the Son is the Father but yet he is without beginning because the Father is without beginning.

The Scriptures itself in John 1:1-3 and 1 John 1:1-3 stated that the Son, the Logos, is "from the beginning( i.e. God)" for God is the " beginning, origin and source of all things" ( 1 Cor. 8:6).

share|improve this answer
add comment

In NME culture, the firstborn, especially the firstborn son, was very special indeed. He had privileges and perquisites subsequent children did not. Interestingly, one of the titles for Jesus is

"Firstborn of all creation" (Colossians 1:15).

This expression does not mean Jesus was created; it does mean that He bears the honorific title of Firstborn, with all the privileges that accrue from it. Not only that, He is the creator of all things (ibid., v.16); He existed before all things and holds all things together by the word of His power (ibid., v.17); He is the head of the church, His body; He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; He has the first place in everything (ibid., v.18); and all the fullness of Deity dwells in Him (ibid., v.19).

Perhaps the greatest verse to indicate the equality of Jesus with the Father (besides Jesus' own words, "He who has seen me has seen the Father. The Father and I are one person," John 10:30; 14:19; 17:21) is Colossians 2:9,

"For in [Jesus] all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form."

This verse does not say that Jesus became Divine when He came to earth as a babe, born of the virgin Mary. He was God the Son in eternity, and He never ceased being God the Son, not for a moment, even during the 33 years of His self-emptying life on earth as the God-Man, Jesus Christ (see Philippians 2:7ff.). Moreover, He will never cease being God, albeit as God in the flesh-and-bone body of a man.

Within the triune Godhead, there is one shining star, and that is Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God. No one preceded Him; no one followed Him. He is sui generis, as the French say. While some Roman Catholics will disagree with me on this point, the eternal Son of God, the second person of the trinity, was neither conceived nor born; He simply is:

"Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8)."

In eternity past, the Son was the delight of His Father, and the Father of the Son. In other words, they loved one another, and always will. Moreover, each person in the Trinity seems to have a unique, yet overlapping, role to play. Concerning the Father and the Son, Jesus said,

"'All things have been handed over [or delegated] to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him'" (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22).

While your question bypasses the role of the Holy Spirit, He too has been delegated a role, which is to reveal Jesus to people by removing the blindness from their spiritual eyes and by imparting Jesus' words of life to them when they are first born from above and then as they grow in Christ. Christ, in other words, is formed in us by the unseen work of the Holy Spirit of God during the lifelong process of sanctification.

The Trinity is indeed a mind-blowing doctrine, neither easily explained nor easily understood. It is, however, part of the bedrock of the Christian faith. The only acceptable sacrifice for sin had to be both fully God and fully man, the infinitely perfect, spotless, and holy Lamb of God. Anyone less than that would not suffice to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself (Heb 9:26).

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.