Why is Jesus called the Only Begottten Son?

[absolute zsion]

Thank you for your reply, and your courtesy, which is much appreciated. Are you saying that Jesus Christ is no different essentially from any human being? I would say that the bible describes Christians as children of God by adoption, whereas Jesus Christ is the Son of God by His very nature.

ooh no, of course not

Jesus Christ is the word of God himself manifested in flesh and was conceived by the Spirit of God. By this Anointing Word whom is Christ Jesus was the heaven and earth created.

Jesus is the blood of God himself who lowered himself and took on human form to be made as a ransom and sacrifice to save from all sin.

thanks for being patient with me on that, and for not rebuking me instantly for blasphemy. I understand your question.
Jesus came directly emitted out of the Spirit of God and was conceived by the Spirit that is Holy ..


Gal 4:4 when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son …….. that we might receive the adoption of sons …….. and because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying - Father, Father.

we are Children of God and can be born again in the newness of the Spirit.

 

[David Lamb]

ooh no, of course not

Jesus Christ is the word of God himself manifested in flesh and was conceived by the Spirit of God. By this Anointing Word whom is Christ Jesus was the heaven and earth created.

Jesus is the blood of God himself who lowered himself and took on human form to be made as a ransom and sacrifice to save from all sin.

thanks for being patient with me on that, and for not rebuking me instantly for blasphemy. I understand your question.
Jesus came directly emitted out of the Spirit of God and was conceived by the Spirit that is Holy ..


Gal 4:4 when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son …….. that we might receive the adoption of sons …….. and because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying - Father, Father.

we are Children of God and can be born again in the newness of the Spirit.

Thanks. Sorry I misunderstood your earlier post.

 

[absolute zsion]

One thing that can be confusing in that how sometimes we can confuse things by forgetting that Jesus did not send himself to earth,

the translation can seem to contradict this when we read - Heb 2:17


Heb 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren

It almost sounds here in “ Heb 2:17 “ that Jesus himself was in heaven deciding on how he would make himself appear on earth as if it was behoven to Jesus himself

As if Jesus himself found it fitting, - or Jesus himself found a benefit, - or Jesus himself found it necessary and personally determined to be made like unto his brethren

but

please remember – in John 8:42 – Jesus says three things here, about his identity.


i COME - “ εκ EX / OUT “ FROM THE GOD –

i COME NOT FOR FROM / OF - MYSELF –

i COME NEITHER MYSELF I - SENT –


εγω I AM - γαρ FOR - εκ OUT / FROM - του THE - θεου GOD - εξηλθον CAME OUT -

και AND - ηκω COME - ουδε NOT - γαρ FOR - απ FROM / OF - εμαυτου MYSELF - εληλυθα

I COME - αλλ NEITHER - εκεινος MYSELF - με I - απεστειλεν SENT.


:42

i COME - “ εκ EX / OUT “ FROM THE GOD -–

I COME NOT ALSO FROM / OF - MYSELF –

i COME NEITHER MYSELF I - SENT –


Jesus did not send himself, nor did Jesus come from or of himself

Here is the what the original manuscript message says in - Heb 2:17


Οθεν WHEREFORE - ωφειλεν HE SHOULD - κατα UPON - παντα ALL - τοις THIS - αδελφοις BROTHERS - ομοιωθηναι TO RESEMBLE - ινα THAT - ελεημων MERCIFULNESS - γενηται BE MADE - και AND - πιστος FAITHFUL - αρχιερευς HIGH PRIEST - τα THAT - προς UNTO - τον THE - θεον GOD - εις INTO - το THIS - ιλασκεσθαι RECONCILIATION - τας OF THIS - αμαρτιας OF SIN - του OF THE - λαου PEOPLE


WHEREFORE HE SHOULD UPON ALL THIS, BROTHERS TO RESEMBLE, THAT MERCIFULNESS BE MADE AND FAITHFUL PRIEST

THAT UNTO THE GOD, INTO THIS, RECONCILIATION OF THIS OF SIN OF THE PEOPLE

The Greek language is such a very simple language and the New Testament was written at a time before modern advancement and technology and began to appear.
The Consistency of the Koine Greek language had already been around for nearly 1,500 years when the New Testament was written, there were not a lot of changing and evolving words as we see in the Old English as Old English was beginning to be reshaped and was evolving into a modern world.
and there are not a lot of words in the Greek New Testament Manuscripts - as we see in the Old English Bible that are going through changes.....

Old English transitioned into Middle English around 1100 AD, and then evolved into Early Modern English by the 1500s and then not being to take shape is what is considered Modern English until after the late 17th century,

the Catholic Douay Rheims was written in 1582 and then its " copy cat " King James translation was written in 1611 - therefore, many, many words were in the process of being redefined and were changing and evolving into a modern world.

Although I am not a fan of the modern bible versions and find that the King James translation is more accurate but the - New American Standard Bible - translates the passage to say......................

New American Standard Bible
Heb 2:17 Therefore, in all things He had to be made like His brothers so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.

Do you think there seems to be a difference between these two translations ?
King James Translation

Heb 2:17 “ Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren


Does the “ King James Version “ seem to be saying that perhaps Jesus himself is personally making the PRE DECISION / and making a decision himself to be made a certain way, whereas the “ American Standard Bible “ does not attempt to make a play on words.

Does the King James Version seem to take advantage of the fact that language is being transitioned over into a modern era ?
can this confuse some readers who do not take time to look closely upon the history of how the Old English transitioned into Modern English ?
or is this just my personal view on the passage of " Heb 2:17 " from the KJV... when we say in modern English " it behoved him " ?

 

[Tambora]

And why don't pastors teach on this topic? Am I weird for wanting information?

From my years of studies in Greek and Hebrew languages, it does not mean that son was the only one sired by their father.
We know this because Hebrews 11 verse 17 calls Isaac an "only begotten" and we certainly know that Isaac was not the only son sired by Abraham.
Scripture uses the term "only begotten son" to mean "unique, as in one of a kind".

 

[JesusFan]

ooh no, of course not

Jesus Christ is the word of God himself manifested in flesh and was conceived by the Spirit of God. By this Anointing Word whom is Christ Jesus was the heaven and earth created.

Jesus is the blood of God himself who lowered himself and took on human form to be made as a ransom and sacrifice to save from all sin.

thanks for being patient with me on that, and for not rebuking me instantly for blasphemy. I understand your question.
Jesus came directly emitted out of the Spirit of God and was conceived by the Spirit that is Holy ..


Gal 4:4 when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son …….. that we might receive the adoption of sons …….. and because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying - Father, Father.

we are Children of God and can be born again in the newness of the Spirit.

Jesus was eternally very God, who in the Incarnated assumed Human flesh and is now forever more also very Man

 

[Eleanor]

ooh no, of course not
Jesus Christ is the word of God himself manifested in flesh and was conceived by the Spirit of God. By this Anointing Word whom is Christ Jesus was the heaven and earth created.
Jesus is the blood of God himself who lowered himself and took on human form to be made as a ransom and sacrifice to save from all sin.
thanks for being patient with me on that, and for not rebuking me instantly for blasphemy. I understand your question.
Jesus came directly emitted out of the Spirit of God and was conceived by the Spirit that is Holy ..

God the Son came directly emitted out of God the Father (Jn 8:42, 16:27, 28, 17:8).
And the Holy Spirit came directly emitted out of God the Father (Jn 15:26).

Jesus of Nazareth, the man, was conceived, not emitted, by the Holy Spirit.

 

[JesusFan]

God the Son came directly emitted out of God the Father (Jn 8:42, 16:27, 28, 17:8).
And the Holy Spirit came directly emitted out of God the Father (Jn 15:26).

Jesus of Nazareth, the man, was conceived, not emitted, by the Holy Spirit.

The Son and The Holy Spirit are eternal along with the father, all 3 equally God, and the Son became the Man Jesus, now fully God fully man

 

[Eleanor]

The Son and The Holy Spirit are eternal along with the father, all 3 equally God, and the Son became the Man Jesus, now fully God fully man

Eternal means
1) without beginning nor end - the eternal Trinity has no beginning nor end,
2) without end - the eternal Jesus of Nazareth has no end, although he had a beginning.

 

[JesusFan]

Eternal means
1) without beginning nor end - the eternal Trinity has no beginning nor end,
2) without end - the eternal Jesus of Nazareth has no end, although he had a beginning.

The Truine God always has existed as such

 

[Eleanor]

The Truine God always has existed as such

But Jesus has not.

 

[Carbon]

But Jesus has not.

Sure he has.

 

[John Bauer]

Sure he has.

The Son has. The existence of Jesus, on the other hand, originates in the incarnation.

 

[David Lamb]

But Jesus has not.

John says otherwise:

“1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.” (Joh 1:1-3 NKJV)

“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” (Joh 1:14 NKJV)

 

[Josheb]

The Son has. The existence of Jesus, on the other hand, originates in the incarnation.

Let me make sure I understand that correctly? Am I to understand Jesus' existence originates in the incarnation? Is that what you mean to say?

 

[Carbon]

John says otherwise:

“1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.” (Joh 1:1-3 NKJV)

“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” (Joh 1:14 NKJV)

Amen brother!

 

[Carbon]

Let me make sure I understand that correctly? Am I to understand Jesus' existence originates in the incarnation? Is that what you mean to say?

Houston, we may have a problem.

 

[John Bauer]

Let me make sure I understand that correctly? Am I to understand Jesus' existence originates in the incarnation? Is that what you mean to say?

Yes. Is this accidentally controversial?

The Son of God has always existed (and even defines existence). Jesus of Nazareth, however (Matt. 1:21)—the incarnation of the Son, the assumption of a human nature—is situated at a particular point in redemptive history. There was a temporal event in which the eternal Son was made flesh and dwelt among us. In that moment, the Son united himself personally and permanently to a true human nature, conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary.

 

[John Bauer]

John says otherwise:

“1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.” (Joh 1:1-3 NKJV)

“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” (Joh 1:14 NKJV)

That is the pre-incarnate Son of God. No Christian denies the eternality of the Son. But Eleanor specifically said "Jesus." That's the incarnate Son, and his assumption of a human nature had a historical origin point.

 

[Josheb]

Yes. Is this accidentally controversial?

The Son of God has always existed (and even defines existence). Jesus of Nazareth, however (Matt. 1:21)—the incarnation of the Son, the assumption of a human nature—is situated at a particular point in redemptive history. There was a temporal event in which the eternal Son was made flesh and dwelt among us. In that moment, the Son united himself personally and permanently to a true human nature, conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary.

How is that reconciled with Philippians 2's report he existed as God before taking on human likeness as a bondservant and doctrines such as aseity and simplicity? If Jesus begins with the incarnation, then something is added to the Godhead at that time.

 

[John Bauer]

How is that reconciled with Philippians 2's report he existed as God before taking on human likeness as a bondservant

Why would a reconciliation be necessary? I said that "the Son of God has always existed" while "Jesus of Nazareth ... is situated at a particular point in redemptive history." Does this not say the same thing as "he existed as God before taking on human flesh"?

... and doctrines such as aseity and simplicity? If Jesus begins with the incarnation, then something is added to the Godhead at that time.

Incorrect. When the Son became incarnate as Jesus, nothing was added to the divine nature (which is immutable, impassible, and simple). Something was added to the person of the Son, namely, a human nature. Nothing was added to the divine nature; neither the Son's deity nor the Godhead was modified or expanded. The Council of Chalcedon was explicit on this:

… one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, known in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union…

This is exactly what Philippians 2:6-8 says, that it was not the Godhead but the Son who took on the form of a bondservant.