The God

 OF

 Jesus

A comprehensive examination of Trinitarianism

Chapter Nine

Is Jesus Eternally Begotten?

       It is a common tenet of Christian theology that Jesus is eternally begotten. Since Jesus is believed to be co-eternal with the Father, it became necessary to view the Scriptural passages that speak of Christ’s begettal in a different manner from the way begettal is normally understood. Belief in the eternal begettal of Jesus is largely tied to the Nicene and Constantinople Creeds of the fourth century.  We will begin our discussion of this issue by providing a short historical overview of perspectives that led to the development of these Creeds. 

       Historically, there have been a variety of positions held as to the nature of God and the relationship between the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.  Second century theologians such as Irenaeus and Justin appear to have believed in the deity and eternal existence of the Father and the Son.  There is indication they also believed the Father and Son were not equal in authority since the Scriptures show the Son as being subordinate to the Father. There is some indication that Justin may not have believed in the eternal existence of the Son.

       In the early second century a teaching appeared called Docetism taken from the Greek word dokeo, which means “to seem" or “to appear.”  This view maintained that Jesus was only divine and was not at all human but only appeared to be human.  A leading proponent of this view was the philosopher/theologian Marcion.  Marcion taught there were two Gods, the legalistic God of the Israelites and the forgiving God of Jesus.

       In the late second and early third century, a view of God developed called Monarchianism. One form of Monarchianism called Dynamic or Adoptionist Monarchianism taught God was a one of a kind deity and Jesus was not deity but a created human person filled with the Holy Spirit and thus able to fulfill God’s (His Father's) will.  Some early Adoptionists even believed Jesus was born not of a virgin but from a normal sexual union of Joseph and Mary and later was “adopted” by His Father God at His baptism or at His resurrection at which time He became the Son of God. This view was held by a Jewish Christian group called Ebionites.    

        Early in the third century a Bishop from Rome named Callistus proposed the idea that the Father actually became Jesus the Son.  This belief was called Patripassian as it postulated the Father participated in humanity as the man Jesus. This was an attempt to preserve the monotheism of the Scriptures while accounting for the deity of the Son. This view has present day proponents in what is called Oneness Theology.    

       A form of Monarchianism called Modalism was taught in the third century by a theologian named Sabellius. Sabellius taught God is only one person who acts as Father in creating the universe, as Son in redeeming sinners and as Holy Spirit in sanctifying believers. While this position may appear Trinitarian on the surface, it is not Trinitarian as it does not view the one God as made up of the three persons of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.  It sees no relationship in God.  It views the one God playing three different roles at different times in history while retaining single personhood.  This view was actually quite popular in the early church as it preserved the oneness of God while allowing for the deity of Jesus.
   
       Also in the third century, the respected scholar and theologian Origen maintained the subordination of the Word (Greek logos) to God the Father. Origen believed the logos of John chapter one is Jesus Christ. Origen emphasized the independence of the logos as well as its distinction from the Being and substance of the Father. Origen apparently believed the logos was not of the same substance as the Father but merely an image of the Father. Origen believed there could be degrees or grades of divinity, with the Son being slightly less divine than the Father.

       Origen pictured God within a framework of the Father being the Supreme Deity over all things while the Son was over creation in a lesser way with the Spirit acting only within the context of the church.   The Spirit was seen as leading back to the Son and the Son back to the Father. It appears Origen considered the Father and the Son to be deity and of eternal existence but not consubstantial and coequal as in later Trinitarian thought.

       In the early fourth century a church leader named Marcellus proposed that the word of God existed eternally as the intrinsic reasoning faculty of God.  When God decided to make the heavens and the earth, the word became the power and energy through which God created all things.  The word later became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ. In this manner Marcellus strove to maintain the oneness of God.  

       Also in the early fourth century, an Alexandrian presbyter by the name of Arius advanced the idea that the Father alone is God with the Son having been created by the one Father God at some point before the universe was created.  Arius believed it was through the Son God created the universe and it was the Son who became Jesus by emptying Himself of the glory He had with the Father.  After completing his mission on earth, Jesus returned to the Father where He was restored to his former glory.  Arius felt this view maintained monotheism as opposed to the polytheism he saw in seeing Jesus as equal deity with the Father.  This view was embraced by a number of Christians but hotly contested by Church leaders who believed the Son to be deity on par with the Father. Much controversy ensued over this issue with Arius being excommunicated by the Bishop of Alexandria.  

       The dispute over this matter came to a head at the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D.  At this council a majority of church leaders sided with the Bishop of Alexandria and a young presbyter named Athanasius who firmly advocated that Jesus is God as much as the Father is God.  Church leaders representing the Athanasius position went head to head with defenders of the Arian position led by Eusebius, the bishop of Nicomedia.  After all was said and done, the Athanasius position prevailed and the belief the Son is consubstantial with the father (“God of very God”) became the accepted position among many of the church hierarchy.  The tenet of the Nicene Creed pertaining to our discussion reads as follows:

       We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; And in the Holy Ghost.

       The Nicene Creed states belief in one God the Father Almighty and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who is begotten of the Father. To this point, the Creed is in total harmony with what the Scriptures instruct as to who the one God is and who the one Lord is.  The Creed shows the one God to be the Father just as Christ, Paul and John taught.  The Creed shows Jesus to be the Son of this one Father God as is seen throughout the NT.  The Creed shows Jesus is begotten by God the Father as is taught in the NT Scriptures. After these introductory statements, however, this Creed begins to teach some things not found in the Scriptures.

       This Creed goes on to define begotten as being of the same essence as the Father. It states Jesus is of the same essence as the Father in every way without being the Father. The Creed uses the Greek word homoousios to say “of one essence.”  Homoousios means “same in substance or essence.”  Homoousios, however, is not found in the Greek Scriptures. NT writers do not use this word to define the relationship between the Son and the Father. Furthermore, it may be inappropriate to use homoousios in speaking of God as the word substance is ordinarily associated with the material world.  Scripture says God is Spirit.  Can we really associate a word like substance with Spirit?  

       After formulation of the Nicene Creed, controversy over the relationship between the Father and the Son raged on for another fifty years.  Both the Arian and the Athanasian views were supported by various Church leaders and Roman government officials. Emperor Constantine of Rome is reported to have died an Arian. During this period, Arius, who had earlier been excommunicated, was reinstated just before his death. Athanasius, who had become Bishop of Alexandria, was alternately condemned by various Church councils and reinstated by others. At times the Arian view prevailed in the Church and at other times the Athanasian view prevailed.  

       It wasn’t until the Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D. that the Trinitarian concept of God won the day and was further affirmed. The Nicene Creed was updated at this council to include the Holy Spirit as proceeding from the Father and worthy of worship as is the Father and the Son.  Thus was established a Trinitarian concept of God. This became the orthodox view of God in the Roman Empire. Many outside the Empire, however, continued to follow the Arian position for hundreds of years.  The tenets of the Constantinople Creed pertaining to our discussion are as follows:

       We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (aeons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man; And in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified.

       It is largely from these Creeds the concept of “eternal begettal” developed.  It is believed Jesus is eternally begotten by the Father. In the English language the word beget means to become the father of a child and is also used in various ways to designate the beginning of something.  The word has the intrinsic meaning of beginning. Therefore, the phrase “eternal begettal” is a virtual nonsense statement.  To postulate an eternal beginning is to postulate a contradiction.  Yet, the concept of the eternal begettal of the Son of God is firmly entrenched in Christian theology. 

       In the NT Scriptures, gennao is the Greek word commonly translated as beget, begat, begotten and born.  It means to become the Father of and is used in a variety of ways to designate a beginning.  Gennao appears 97 times in the NT and by context can be seen to most often refer to becoming the father of someone and where it is not used in this manner it can be seen to show the beginning of something.    

       In Acts 13, Apostle Paul addresses an assembly of Israelites and Gentiles who had gathered together in a synagogue on the Sabbath. He provides a short history of the Nation of Israel and shows how God brought Jesus to Israel through the descendants of David.  He then relates how the people and leadership of Israel did not recognize Jesus for who He was and condemned Him to death.  Paul then makes the following statement:

       Acts 13:32-33: We tell you the good news: What God promised our fathers he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father” (NIV).

       The Greek word translated “become” in this passages is gennao.  In most English translations of this passage this word is translated “begotten.”  Paul shows Jesus to be a descendant of David and goes on to apply to Him the OT passage that speaks of God becoming a Father of the Son. We know from our review of OT Scripture, the Father is YHWH and is without beginning or end.  Trinitarians claim the Son is also YHWH and without beginning or end.  Yet we see the Father becoming the Father of Jesus at a specific point in time indicating a beginning for the Son. We see more of this in the letter to the Hebrews.

        Hebrews 1:5: For to which of the angels did God ever say, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father”? Or again, "I will be his Father, and he will be my Son”?  

       Hebrews 5:5: So Christ also did not take upon himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to him, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father.”

       As in Acts 13, the Greek word translated “become” in these passages is gennao.  In most English translations of this passage this word is translated “begotten.”  When did God the Father become the Father of Jesus?  When was Jesus begotten by the Father? 

       Matthew 1:20: But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived (gennao) in her is from the Holy Spirit.

       Luke 1:35:  The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born (gennao) will be called the Son of God.

       Jesus came to be called the Son of God as a result of God the Father bringing about the impregnation of Mary through the power of His Spirit. The Most High God, the Father, played a direct role in facilitating the begettal of Jesus and thus became the Father of Jesus.  There is no Scriptural reason to believe God eternally begat the Son.  The very concept of eternal begettal is a contradiction in terminology.  Begettal means a beginning as opposed to a non beginning which the word eternal implies. Matthew makes it clear Jesus had an origin and is not without beginning.   

       Matthew 1:18:  This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit.

       The Greek word translated into the English word birth in Matthew 1:18, is gennesis which is a derivative of gennao and means to be begotten or born.  Like gennao, gennesis implies a beginning. In the oldest Greek Manuscripts, the Greek word genesis is found instead of gennesis.  Genesis can mean birth but can also mean creation, beginning and origination.   It is interesting that Matthew uses the Greek genesis at the start of his Gospel to introduce the ancestry of Jesus.

       Matthew 1:1: The book of the generation (Greek genesis) of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

        Some argue that because Mary was impregnated by the power of God, immortal  divine essence of the Father was passed on to Jesus the Son much like mortal human essence is passed on to a baby through impregnation of male sperm into a female egg. It is argued that since Jesus, through Mary, was a descendant of David seeing that Mary was of the lineage of David, God’s impregnation of Mary was the combining of “divine sperm” with the human ovum of Mary to produce the “God/man” Jesus.

       Did the Father impregnate the ovum of Mary with “divine sperm” which passed on to Jesus divine essence?  Scripture says nothing about Mary being impregnated by “divine sperm.”  Scripture reveals Mary becoming pregnant through the power of God.  This is all Scripture reveals about this event. We don’t know how God did this other than knowing it was accomplished through the power of His Spirit.  God is the creator of physical life. God directly created Adam. Directly creating Adam didn’t pass on divine essence to Adam as we know Adam was mortal and he died. There is no Scriptural reason to believe God passed on divine essence to Jesus by facilitating Mary’s pregnancy.                                                                                      

       Unless we are willing to totally disregard the meaning of words in order to uphold a particular doctrinal position, it should be evident that when the Scriptures speak of the begettal of Jesus, they are speaking of His origination at a particular time in history.  To look at accounts of His begettal and conclude these accounts are speaking of His begettal being an ongoing event throughout all eternity and continuing to this very day is ludicrous to say the least.

 CHAPTER TEN