'only begotten Son' or 'only begotten God'?
by, June 16th, 2014 at 12:44 AM (2011 Views)
We debate and explore this question concerning John 1:18 [URL="http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3928091&postcount=1348"]here[/URL] & [URL="http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3930419&postcount=1395"]here.[/URL]
These shall suffice for now with corresponding commentary links. The key consideration here is that while 'only begotten Son' seems to be the most appropriate translation...even if we use the early Alexandrian manuscripts with the rendering ' only begotten god'...a Unitarian interpretation is tenable here...since Jesus is he who reveals the invisible 'God' being God's representative, the one making him known.
Jesus maintains his special Sonship status as the Son of Man/Son of God....and while serving as God's Agent can also be called 'god' (elohim; one in divine standing or rule).....being a 'god', not The 'God' (the One and Only Deity-Father). Jesus logically forever maintains his Sonship by virtue of the Father being his father ( and God), he being begotten or generated out from Infinite One, who is the Father of [U][U]all[/U][/U].
[URL="http://www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/trinity/verses/Jn1_18.html"][B]John 1:18 Revealed[/B][/URL]
[URL="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/only-begotten-god-obgod.html"][B]Only begotten God?[/B][/URL]
[URL="http://av1611.com/kjbp/faq/holland_joh1_18.html"][B]King James Bible perspective[/B][/URL]
[URL="http://bibleq.net/answer/1399/"][B]“Only begotten Son” or “only begotten God”? (John 1:18[/B][/URL])