03.02. Christ's Two Begettings
Chapter 2 - CHRIST’S TWO BEGETTINGS The incarnation of Jesus Christ was a change of state but not a change of nature. He was veiled in human flesh. Personal and official glories of the Son of God were both hidden, except where the faith of the elect discovered them. John said, “...we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father...” (John 1:14). The glory of the tabernacle was God tabernacling in its midst. The glory of the church is the only begotten Son of God dwelling in her midst (Matthew 18:20). Only God’s gift of faith sees that glory. The faith of the disciples penetrated Christ’s human nature and beheld the glory of the eternal Son who is full of grace and truth. The Lord Jesus walked through the land unrecognized as the Divine Son except where the light of the Spirit of regeneration enabled one to behold the Light of the world concealed by human nature. Christ’s moral glory, however, could not be hidden. He could not conceal a perfect life which was manifested by His words and works. God is absolute purity, uncontaminated even by the shadow of sin:
“...God is light, and in him is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5).
Christ’s twofold begetting is the foundation of the elect of God being begotten again unto a living hope (1 Peter 1:3). The eternal God comes to the elect in time that the elect in time can go to God eternally. This has been made possible by the eternally begotten Son being born in time thus providing the means whereby the elect born in time can be born again for eternity. The twice begotten Son-once in eternity and once in time-obtained eternal redemption for the elect who must be begotten twice in time to spend eternity with God (Hebrews 9:12; John 3:1-8). Unlike the begetting of the elect in time, Christ’s twofold begetting is divided between eternity and time. His eternal begetting is without beginning. The Lord Jesus is the only accepted once-begotten Person in time. God’s elect, however, are twice born in time. They are born physically, and then, born from above. The eternally begotten Son of the eternal Father must be begotten in time to be the Mediator between the holy Father and the elect given to Him in the covenant of redemption. The mystery of the first begetting is a vital part of the mystery of the Son’s second begetting, and both are the foundation of the mystery of the begetting again of the elect. Paul said, “Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; Even the mystery which hath been hid from the ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Colossians 1:25-27). The Father vindicated the Son’s declaration that He and the Father are equal: “...He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him” (John 5:23). The title “Son of God” permeates the first epistle of John.
The blood of the Son cleanses (1 John 1:7). The Son is the Advocate with the Father (1 John 2:1-2). The unction causes believers to abide in the Son
(1 John 2:20). Faith in the Son gives victory over the world (1 John 5:4-5). God’s record testifies of the Son (1 John 5:9-13). We have life in the Son
(1 John 5:12). The Son came to give understanding (1 John 5:20).
The Son is the true God and eternal life (1 John 5:20). The title “only begotten Son” has been the source of controversy since the third century after Christ’s death. Origen of Alexandria taught that Christ is from God and not God in Himself; He was generated not in time but in eternity. In the fourth century, Arius taught that God has not always been Father. He believed there was a time He was alone; but the eternal God made the Son a creature before all creatures; and He adopted Him for His Son. This teaching brought about great controversy. The church fathers concluded that the word “begotten” meant an inexplicable relationship and not an event.
There is a new theory about Sonship taught today. Some say to apply “begotten” to Jesus Christ in His eternal Deity in the past is a traditional error. Those who embrace this view say “begotten” refers to Christ as born of the virgin in time. They believe the Reformers, in trying to escape Arianism, invented the phrase “eternal generation.” While this view is incorrect, one must understand this revolutionary idea does not deny the eternal Sonship of Jesus Christ.
Some boldly proclaim that the Bible says nothing about “begetting” as an eternal relationship between the Father and the Son. They advocate dropping the statement “eternal generation” from the vocabulary of theology. The following are some arguments against the term “eternal generation.”
(1) Theologians, trying to escape the difficulty of Arianism, invented the phrase “eternal generation.”
(2) “Begotten” refers to Christ’s birth of the virgin in time.
(3) God was not known to any man as Father until the Man was here who is called the Son of God (Luke 1:35).
(4) The Person spoken of in Hebrews 1:5 is represented as Son. He is called Son because Sonship is related to His Manhood.
(5) The assumption that prophetic statements of what Christ would be could be taken as setting forth facts subsisting as actualities at the time they were written would make the Scriptures nonsensical. Hebrews 1:5 is a quotation of Psalms 2:7. The Sonship of Christ does not go back into eternity.
(6) Scripture does not speak of “eternal Father” or “eternal Son.” Father and Son are names which could be known only through the incarnation.
(7) The one who is eternally God has come into the place and relationship of Son. This involved obedience to the Father.
“Eternal generation” is a human term designed to explain, as well as one can, the inexplicable. Explaining the inexplicable can be likened to knowing the unknowable (Ephesians 3:18-19). “Trinity” is a human term used to explain the mystery of the Godhead. Objectors to the use of “eternal generation” use the human term “Trinity.” Hence, they are not consistent. If one human term should be dropped, consistency would demand dropping all human terms. If this is done, interpretation is impossible. Human interpretation falls short of perfection, but all Christians are responsible to interpret. The task of the interpreter is to use materials provided and make them as understandable as possible. Christ existed as Son from all eternity. What is this but eternal generation? God does not generate as man because there is a difference in nature. In human generation, the father exists before the son. However, in the Godhead, the Father and Son coexist. As there is a distinction of the Persons in the Godhead in time, there must be a distinction of Persons by name in eternity. God’s knowledge is infinite (Psalms 147:5). There is no new thought with Him. God knows all things simultaneously. Eternal generation is an anomalous (inconsistent with the accepted or expected) expression to declare the inexpressible. It is acceptable for the want of a better term. It is not objectionable when one considers such Biblical truths as eternal election and eternal justification. The Lord Jesus is eternally the only One of His kind. The Greek word for “only begotten” is monogenes. It comes from two words:
(1) monos, which means sole, single, alone, only; and
(2) genos, which means kind, class, family, offspring. “Only begotten,” therefore, means the only one of its kind, unique. Everything in the Divine nature is eternal; therefore, the “only begotten” is eternal. The incarnation, baptism, and resurrection were manifestations of Sonship: “Concerning his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead” (Romans 1:3-4).
Some hold firmly to the eternal Sonship of Christ, but they refuse the term “only begotten” and substitute “well-beloved.” We have two sources of information for our understanding of “only begotten.” The Hebrew yahidt occurs twelve times in the Old Testament. It is translated “my darling” (Psalms 22:20; Psalms 35:17), “desolate” (Psalms 25:16), “solitary” (Psalms 68:6), “only beloved” (Proverbs 4:3), “only son”
(Genesis 22:2; Genesis 22:12; Genesis 22:16; Jeremiah 6:26; Amos 8:10; Zechariah 12:10), and “only child” (Judges 11:34). In the New Testament the word monogenes occurs nine times. Three times the word is used of an “only child” (Luke 7:12; Luke 8:42; Luke 9:38), once of Isaac (Hebrews 11:17), and five times of the Son of God (John 1:14; John 1:18; John 3:16; John 3:18; 1 John 4:9). Some have been confused about the passage in Hebrews 11:17. They say Isaac was not the only son. Ishmael was also Abraham’s son. However, the principle of Romans 9:7 clears up the confusion: “Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.” The word monogenes is not the ordinary word for “beloved” when applied to Jesus Christ. It is the word agapetos which is used in such passages as Matthew 3:17 and Matthew 17:5. If monogenes referred to Christ’s incarnation, such passages as Matthew 3:17 and Matthew 17:5 would have been appropriate places to have used them. The fact is that monogenes speaks of the eternal Sonship of Jesus Christ.
All Persons of the Godhead are equal, but they must be distinguished. How are they distinguished? How does one conclude who is number one? Who is number two? Who is number three?
There are many references in the New Testament which state the Father sent the Son: “...He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him” (John 5:23). “As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me” (John 6:57). “But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law” (Galatians 4:4). There are three different Greek words used for “sending” in these passages. They are pempo (John 5:23), apostello (John 6:57), and exapostello (Galatians 4:4). These words are not used for the sake of variety. Pempo means to send, commission, or appoint. Apostello means to send out or away. Exapostello means to send away from oneself. The Father who sends is greater than the Son who is sent. Christ said, “...I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I” (John 14:28). John 10:30 proves the Lord Jesus spoke of priority of position, not inferiority of nature: “I and my Father are one.” Paul also confirmed the priority of the Father’s position: “...the head of Christ is God” (1 Corinthians 11:3). The Father sent the Son, and both Father and Son are said to have sent the Holy Spirit: “And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father” (Galatians 4:6). Christ said, “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me” (John 15:26). Since the Father and the Son both sent the Spirit, they are greater in priority but not superior in nature.
Each Person of the Godhead has a distinguishing quality of His own, yet the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God. The Son is of the Father, but the Father is never of the Son. The Spirit is of the Father and the Son. The Father operates through the Son, and the Father and the Son operate through the Holy Spirit. Some things are attributed to all three Persons; but, on the other hand, certain acts are predicated of one Person which are never predicated of the other two Persons. Neither Person is God without the others, but each with the others is God. The Father elects. The Son redeems. The Holy Spirit regenerates. The title “Son” cannot be restricted to the incarnation of Jesus Christ. “Son” is a term that would not apply to the second Person of the Godhead if He were the Son only in an official or ethical sense. Jesus Christ sustains a relation to God which can be compared only with that which a son among men sustains to his father. The title refers to equality in nature. Therefore, the One who was eternally Son was manifested as Son in time.
Three references in the New Testament where the word “begotten” is used to speak of Christ do not mean “only begotten.” The word for “begotten” of Acts 13:33, Hebrews 1:5, and Hebrews 5:5 is gegenneka, the perfect tense of gennao, which means to be the father of, to cause to be born, or to cause to arise, engender, excite. In Acts 13:33, Paul quoted Psalms 2:7 in defense of Christ’s resurrection. Hence, Christ was manifested with power when He rose from the dead. “Begotten” (gegenneka), therefore, means “Thou art my Son, this day have I brought thee forth or delivered thee up from the dead.” In Hebrews 1:5, Jesus Christ is revealed to be greater than the angels. Angels are called sons (Job 1:6; Job 2:1; Job 38:7), but they are not manifested as the Son of God is. The writer to the Hebrews quoted not only a portion of Psalms 2:7 but a part of 2 Samuel 7:14 - “I will be his father, and he shall be my son.” This statement could never be used to speak of the eternal relationship of Father and Son. 2 Samuel 7:14 referred to Solomon in the immediate sense but to the Son of God in the ultimate sense. Solomon was king, but Jesus Christ would be the theocratic King. Finally, in Hebrews 5:5, the validity of Christ’s priesthood is proved. The same Person who said “Thou art my son...,” also said “...Thou art a priest for ever...” (Hebrews 5:6). Christ’s qualification for the office is revealed in the first statement, and the proof of His appointment is manifested by God’s oath in the latter. The priesthood of Jesus Christ is greater than the Aaronic priesthood. Being the Son of God eternally and being manifested the Son of God in time are two different things. The “only begotten” (monogenes) is never used in connection with Christ’s human nature, but the words gennao (to be born, to cause to arise) and prototokos (firstborn) are associated with the incarnation. Having considered the references where “begotten,” gegenneka, is used, let us now investigate the word prototokos. It is used seven times in connection with the incarnation of Jesus Christ (Matthew 1:25; Luke 2:7; Romans 8:29; Colossians 1:15; Colossians 1:18; Hebrews 1:6; Revelation 1:5). The word prototokos comes from protos which means foremost, whether in time, place, order, or importance. The birth of Jesus Christ is superior and therefore has priority over all births, creatures, and events. Christ is said to be the firstborn Son of Mary, firstborn among many brethren, firstborn of every creature, firstborn from the dead, firstborn who shall be brought into the world, and firstborn of the dead. The adjective “superior” and the noun “priority” fit each verse where prototokos is used in connection with Jesus Christ. The human nature of Christ was not eternally in the bosom of the Father. However, the “only begotten” was and is in the bosom of the Father. This destroys the theory that Sonship is related only to Christ’s Manhood. Since the Father gave His only begotten Son, He was the only begotten Son before He was given (John 1:18; John 3:16). Christ said the person who has not believed in the “name” of the only begotten Son is already condemned (John 3:18). The word “name” speaks of Christ’s very being and nature-His Person and Work as revealed to men. Does the word “name” include Christ’s Sonship? We must not forget that God sees future, present, and past all at once. God is one mind. He has a fixed and settled purpose. All history is but one. There is no succession in God’s knowledge, but there is in the revelation of that knowledge to men. Since God’s knowledge is infinite, Sonship was not a revelation to Him who knows everything as present. If one says that Christ is God’s Son by virtue of the everlasting covenant, how can he say a covenant begat Him? Begetting implies a Person, not a compact. A covenant implies the existence of covenant parties. If one says that Christ is the Son of God by virtue of the union of the Divine and human natures, how does he answer the fact that the “only begotten” is never associated with Christ’s human nature? “That holy thing” was not called the Son of God, but the Person clothed in that was (Luke 1:35). If Jesus Christ is the Son of God merely by virtue of the hypostatic union, where is the blessedness of the declaration, “...This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased”
(Matthew 3:17)? Finally, if Jesus Christ is Son of God merely by the incarnation, the Holy Spirit would be His Father, “declared the Son of God” would be meaningless, and there would be no uniqueness about His Sonship. That uniqueness is the Son of God becoming the Son of Man while remaining the Son of God.
There seems to be some confusion about the title “Son of Man.” Some teach that the human birth of Christ did not make Him the Son of Man. They cite John 3:13 and John 6:62 in defense of their view that the Son of Man descended out of heaven and He ascended up where He was before. The answer to this is not difficult when one realizes that all things have, with respect to God, a known and a real existence. Both are eternally known to God. However, the God-Man did not coexist with the Father, but the Father coexisted with the God-Man. There is no time with God. He is the first and last simultaneously (Isaiah 41:4). Christ’s human nature was neither from heaven nor omnipresent, but the Son of God who assumed the human nature in time was omnipresent. Therefore, the Son of God who became the Son of Man in time did not cease to be the omnipresent Son of God. That is the answer to both John 3:13 and John 6:62.
Jesus Christ is not said to be begotten of the Father in any sense except as the Father bore testimony to Him as being His unique Son. Psalms 2:7 has been a verse of much controversy among Bible students. Some feel the controversy is unprofitable. It has been said that the dispute reveals presumptuous curiosity rather than reverent faith. Personally, I believe this is an excuse for lack of study to learn as much as possible about the infinite God. The Psalmist boldly described God’s victory over His enemies. Functions of government are centered in the Son of God. Therefore, God said, “Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion” (Psalms 2:6). The kingdom predicted is not soteriological but eschatological. The appointed King expressed who He is and what He is able to do by virtue of the Divine decree: “I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee” (Psalms 2:7). Five things must be observed in the text:
(1) Jesus Christ is Son.
(2) He is My Son, i.e., the Son of God.
(3) He is the Son of God begotten. “Begotten” comes from the Hebrew word yalad, which means to bear and bring forth as a mother (Genesis 4:1); to beget as a father (Genesis 4:18). With the second Person of the Godhead, a relation would exist which could be compared with that of a father and a son. The word “generation” is not inconsistent with equality. The Reformers used the word in the sense of individuals having equal status at the same time, not in the sense of procreation.
(4) The Son of God is begotten this day. “This day” refers to the time the decree was revealed. Since this was a Divine act, it was eternal. This proves the eternal Sonship which the decree (law or statute) declares. There is no succession, yesterday, or tomorrow but one continuous day in eternity
(Isaiah 43:13). The Psalmist is the seer, and the Psalm is a picture of what he saw and heard.
(5) The begotten was by saying. Hence, the eternal Son was begotten by the eternal Father in the sense of the Father’s testimony:
“...the LORD said...Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.” The argument that “eternal Father” and “eternal Son” are not Scriptural expressions is illogical. It is a fact that both are eternal. Furthermore, it is a fact that God’s knowledge is infinite (Psalms 147:5). Since God understands our thoughts afar off, to say the terms “Father” and “Son” were not understood by God until they were revealed in the incarnation would be against all logic. The Psalmist said, “Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off” (Psalms 139:2). This means before a thought becomes my own it is eternally comprehended by God. The incarnation would give a complete account of both Sonship and Fatherhood (John 1:18; Matthew 11:27; Luke 10:22). God alone can declare God. The Greek word for “declare” of John 1:18 is exegesato. It comes from two words - ek, out of, and hegeomai, to take the lead; to think, consider, esteem, regard; to be chief, to preside, govern. Hence, the full account of Fatherhood and Sonship is necessary for the elect’s salvation. Therefore, Fatherhood had to be there in order to be brought out. Fatherhood cannot exist apart from Sonship. Hence, the “Son” was given
(Isaiah 9:6). The Son is equal with the Father (John 5:17-47; John 10:30). He is the image of God (Hebrews 1:3). The word “image” involves two things-representation and manifestation. The Son of God, therefore, is not simply the revealer of God, but He Himself is God revealed. In order to reveal the Father, the Son condescended to take the place of subjection to the Father. The place of subjection as the God-Man was to reveal the Father and redeem the elect.
Two Persons are revealed in Psalms 2:7 -the Father and the Son. The Son’s begetting by the Father’s testimony is a declaration of an eternal fact in the Divine nature. Lancelot Andrewes shows there is a resemblance between begetting and speaking. Both result in bringing forth. When one speaks, he does it either within himself or without to others. What one speaks comes from what he thought. The thought is a form of generation known only to oneself until the thought is declared. When the thought is expressed, it takes on a form of expression called the second begetting. Let it be fully understood that the day of Christ’s begetting is for the elect. He was eternally begotten in the purpose of the Father to be begotten of the virgin Mary in time. Both result in bringing forth. The purpose (decree) was brought forth: “...when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman...” (Galatians 4:4). Therefore, the Word which was eternally with God and known only to God was revealed by the Spirit to the seer in prophecy. This is what is taught in Psalms 2:7. But there is more to come. The prophecy of the eternally begotten Son became a reality when the Word was made flesh and dwelt among men (John 1:1; John 1:14).
Hence, the eternally begotten was begotten in time.