572 lines
88 KiB
HTML
572 lines
88 KiB
HTML
|
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
|
||
|
|
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en-gb" lang="en-gb" >
|
||
|
|
<head>
|
||
|
|
<base href="http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/books/gospel-of-john/253-one-and-only-issue-in-john-114.html" />
|
||
|
|
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
|
||
|
|
<meta name="robots" content="index, follow" />
|
||
|
|
<meta name="keywords" content="John 1:14, monogenes, Logos" />
|
||
|
|
<meta name="title" content="One and Only Issue in John 1:14" />
|
||
|
|
<meta name="author" content="18ptTR" />
|
||
|
|
<meta name="description" content="The translation that the Word is only begotten is wrong. Rather the Word is the One and Only sent by the Father to dwell in Jesus, meaning the Sheckina glory" />
|
||
|
|
<meta name="generator" content="Joomla! 1.5 - Open Source Content Management" />
|
||
|
|
<title>One and Only Issue in John 1:14</title>
|
||
|
|
<script type="text/javascript" src="/media/system/js/mootools.js"></script>
|
||
|
|
<script type="text/javascript" src="/media/system/js/caption.js"></script>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<link rel="shortcut icon" href="/images/favicon.ico" />
|
||
|
|
<link rel="stylesheet" href="/templates/system/css/system.css" type="text/css" />
|
||
|
|
<link rel="stylesheet" href="/templates/system/css/general.css" type="text/css" />
|
||
|
|
<link href="/templates/js_relevant/css/template_css.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen" />
|
||
|
|
<link href="/templates/js_relevant/css/nav.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen" />
|
||
|
|
<link href="/templates/js_relevant/css/style1.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen" />
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<!--[if IE]>
|
||
|
|
<link href="/templates/js_relevant/css/ie.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen" />
|
||
|
|
<![endif]-->
|
||
|
|
<!--[if IE]>
|
||
|
|
<link href="/templates/js_relevant/css/ie.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen" />
|
||
|
|
<![endif]-->
|
||
|
|
<!--[if lte IE 6]>
|
||
|
|
<style type="text/css">
|
||
|
|
img { behavior: url(/templates/js_relevant/js/iepngfix.htc); }
|
||
|
|
</style>
|
||
|
|
<![endif]-->
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</head>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<body>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<div id="main-wrapper">
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<div id="header_graphic">
|
||
|
|
<div class="inside">
|
||
|
|
<div id="newsflash"> <div class="moduletable">
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<table class="contentpaneopen">
|
||
|
|
<tr>
|
||
|
|
<td valign="top" >"Paul is the apostle of the heretics." Tertullian,<em> Adversus Marcion</em> 3:5 (207 A.D.)</td>
|
||
|
|
</tr>
|
||
|
|
<tr>
|
||
|
|
<td valign="top" >
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</td>
|
||
|
|
</tr>
|
||
|
|
</table>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
<h1><a href="http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/" title="Relevant">Relevant</a></h1>
|
||
|
|
<h2>A Joomla! Template for the Rest of Us</h2>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
<div class="menubar">
|
||
|
|
<div id="navmenu">
|
||
|
|
<script type="text/javascript" src="/templates/js_relevant/js/barmenu.js"></script>
|
||
|
|
<ul class="menu"><li><a href="http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/"><span>Home</span></a></li><li class="haschild active"><a href="/books.html" class="haschild"><span>Books</span></a><ul><li><a href="/books/jesuswordsonly.html"><span>Jesus' Words Only</span></a></li><li><a href="/books/jesuswordssalvation.html"><span>Jesus' Words on Salvation</span></a></li><li class="haschild"><a href="/books/didcalvinmurderservetus.html" class="child"><span>Did Calvin Murder Servetus?</span></a><ul><li><a href="/books/didcalvinmurderservetus/background-material-did-calvin-murder-servetus.html"><span>Background Material</span></a></li></ul></li><li><a href="/books/hownottosudythebible.html"><span>How Not to Study the Bible</span></a></li><li><a href="/books/flawsofyoungearthscience.html"><span>Flaws of Young Earth Science</span></a></li><li><a href="/books/unintended-disservice.html"><span>Unintended Disservice</span></a></li><li><a href="/books/original-gospel-of-matthew.html"><span>Original Gospel of Matthew</span></a></li><li><a href="/books/commands-of-jesus.html"><span>Commands of Jesus</span></a></li><li id="current" class="active"><a href="/books/gospel-of-john.html"><span>Gospel of John</span></a></li></ul></li><li><a href="/recommendedreading.html"><span>Further Reading</span></a></li><li><a href="/media.html"><span>Media</span></a></li><li class="haschild"><a href="/reviews.html" class="haschild"><span>Reviews</span></a><ul><li><a href="/reviews/jwo-reviews.html"><span>Jesus Words Only</span></a></li><li><a href="/reviews/jwos-reviews.html"><span>Jesus Words on Salvation</span></a></li></ul></li><li><a href="/contactus.html"><span>Contact Us</span></a></li><li><a href="http://astore.amazon.com/jwoogm-20"><span>Book Shop</span></a></li><li><a href="/topicindex.html"><span>Topic Index</span></a></li><li><a href="/aboutauthor.html"><span>About Author</span></a></li><li><a href="/newsletters.html"><span>Newsletters</span></a></li></ul>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<div id="mainbody">
|
||
|
|
<div id="showcasetop"> </div>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<table width="940" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" align="center">
|
||
|
|
<tr>
|
||
|
|
<td id="leftcol" valign="top" width="200">
|
||
|
|
<div class="inside">
|
||
|
|
<div class="moduleS1">
|
||
|
|
<div>
|
||
|
|
<div>
|
||
|
|
<div>
|
||
|
|
<h3>Questions?</h3>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Please enter your questions, and we will get back to you as soon as possible. As an anti-spam measure, we ask that you re-type the code you see in the box below, prior to clicking "Send Message"<br /><br />
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<form name="s5_quick_contact" method="post" action="">
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<input class="inputbox" id="namebox" onclick="s5_qc_clearname()" onfocus="s5_qc_clearname()" style="font-size:11px; font-family:arial; width:80%" type="text" value="Name..." name="name"></input><br />
|
||
|
|
<input class="inputbox" id="emailbox" onclick="s5_qc_clearemail()" onfocus="s5_qc_clearemail()" style="font-size:11px; font-family:arial; width:80%" type="text" value="Email..." name="email"></input><br />
|
||
|
|
<input class="inputbox" id="subjectbox" onclick="s5_qc_clearsubject()" onfocus="s5_qc_clearsubject()" style="font-size:11px; font-family:arial; width:80%" type="text" value="Subject..." name="subject"></input><br />
|
||
|
|
<textarea id="messagebox" rows="" cols="" class="inputbox textarea" onclick="s5_qc_clearbody()" onfocus="s5_qc_clearbody()" style="font-size:11px; font-family:arial; overflow:auto;width:80%; height:55px" name="message">Your Message...</textarea><br />
|
||
|
|
<input class="inputbox" id="spambox" onclick="s5_qc_clearspam()" onfocus="s5_qc_clearspam()" style="font-weight:bold; font-size:11px; font-family:arial; width:80%" type="text" value="Enter The Code 9591" name="verif_box"></input><br />
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<input id="email_address" type="hidden" value="" name="email_address"></input>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<input class="button" type="button" onclick="s5_qc_submit()" value="Send Message" ></input>
|
||
|
|
</form>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">
|
||
|
|
// <![CDATA[
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
var s5_qc_spam_text = document.getElementById("spambox").value;
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
function s5_qc_clearbody() {
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("messagebox").value == "Your Message...") {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("messagebox").value="";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("namebox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("namebox").value = "Name...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("emailbox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("emailbox").value = "Email...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("subjectbox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("subjectbox").value = "Subject...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("spambox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("spambox").value = s5_qc_spam_text;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
function s5_qc_clearname() {
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("namebox").value == "Name...") {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("namebox").value="";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("messagebox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("messagebox").value = "Your Message...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("emailbox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("emailbox").value = "Email...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("subjectbox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("subjectbox").value = "Subject...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("spambox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("spambox").value = s5_qc_spam_text;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
function s5_qc_clearemail() {
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("emailbox").value == "Email...") {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("emailbox").value="";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("namebox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("namebox").value = "Name...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("messagebox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("messagebox").value = "Your Message...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("subjectbox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("subjectbox").value = "Subject...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("spambox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("spambox").value = s5_qc_spam_text;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
function s5_qc_clearsubject() {
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("subjectbox").value == "Subject...") {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("subjectbox").value="";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("namebox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("namebox").value = "Name...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("emailbox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("emailbox").value = "Email...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("messagebox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("messagebox").value = "Your Message...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("spambox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("spambox").value = s5_qc_spam_text;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
function s5_qc_clearspam() {
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("spambox").value == s5_qc_spam_text) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("spambox").value="";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("namebox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("namebox").value = "Name...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("emailbox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("emailbox").value = "Email...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("messagebox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("messagebox").value = "Your Message...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("subjectbox").value.length < 1) {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("subjectbox").value = "Subject...";
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
function s5_qc_isValidEmail(str_email) {
|
||
|
|
if (str_email.indexOf(".") > 2 && str_email.indexOf("@") > 0) {
|
||
|
|
alert('Your email is now being submitted - Thank you!');
|
||
|
|
document.s5_quick_contact.submit();
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
else {
|
||
|
|
alert('Your email address is not valid, please check again - Thank you!');
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
function s5_qc_submit() {
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("spambox").value == s5_qc_spam_text || document.getElementById("subjectbox").value == "Subject..." || document.getElementById("namebox").value == "Name..." || document.getElementById("emailbox").value == "Email..." || document.getElementById("messagebox").value == "Your Message...") {
|
||
|
|
alert('All fields are required, please complete the form - Thank you!');
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (document.getElementById("spambox").value != "9591") {
|
||
|
|
alert('Your spam verification answer is incorrect.');
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
var s5_message_holder = document.getElementById("messagebox").value;
|
||
|
|
var s5_first_message_char = s5_message_holder.charAt(0);
|
||
|
|
var s5_second_message_char = s5_message_holder.charAt(1);
|
||
|
|
var s5_third_message_char = s5_message_holder.charAt(2);
|
||
|
|
var s5_fourth_message_char = s5_message_holder.charAt(3);
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_first_message_char == "<") {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_first_message_char == "w" && s5_second_message_char == "w" && s5_third_message_char == "w") {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_first_message_char == "h" && s5_second_message_char == "t" && s5_third_message_char == "t") {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if (s5_message_holder.indexOf("s5_qc_null") >= 0) {
|
||
|
|
return false;
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
else {
|
||
|
|
document.getElementById("email_address").value = "info@jesuswordsonly.com";
|
||
|
|
var email_str = document.getElementById("emailbox").value;
|
||
|
|
s5_qc_isValidEmail(email_str);
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
// ]]>
|
||
|
|
</script>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
</td>
|
||
|
|
<td id="maincol" valign="top">
|
||
|
|
<div id="breadcrumbs">
|
||
|
|
<span class="breadcrumbs pathway">
|
||
|
|
<a href="http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/" class="pathway">Home</a> <img src="/templates/js_relevant/images/arrow.png" alt="" /> <a href="/books.html" class="pathway">Books</a> <img src="/templates/js_relevant/images/arrow.png" alt="" /> Gospel of John</span>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<table class="contentpaneopen">
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<tr>
|
||
|
|
<td valign="top">
|
||
|
|
<h1><span style="font-size: 24pt; color: #0000ff;">The One and Only Issue in John 1:14</span></h1>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt; color: #000000;" data-mce-mark="1">A Greek word <em>monogenes</em> is at the cross-hairs of doctrine in John 1:14. It has been stretched by everyone in two different directions. Its true constituent parts are <em>mono</em> = one (like <em>mono-logue</em>) and <em>genos</em> ("kind"). It was once thought its second constituent part was from <em>gennao </em>“to beget, father, procreate" = thus supposedly intended here to refer to a generated being, typically a son or daughter.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">But Thayer says <em>monogenes</em> means simply "single of its kind." However, Thayer points out its known use was "only of sons and daughters." (Thayer, "<a href="http://www.searchgodsword.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3439">monogenes</a>.") Even if true, that would not make adding "begotten" appropriate. Incidentally, Thayer's claim is not true, for in John 1:18, in the Greek mss from Alexandria which the NIV relies upon today, "monogenes" refers to the "one and only God (<em>theos </em>)." (See Study Notes on John 1:18 at end of this article.) So <em>monogenes</em> is used not only in reference to sons or daughters, but to God "theos" Himself. Hence, Ehrman is correct that <em>monogenes </em>"outside the New Testament, means 'one of a kind,' or 'unique,'" and nothing more. (Bart Ehrman, <em>The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture</em> (Oxford University Press, 1993) at 81.) </span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Again, as we said, even if Thayer were correct and such usage were limited to sons and daughters (which is not true), this does not allow us to translate <em>monogenes</em> as an "only son" or "only begotten son." Rather, it only signifies we can say of a son or daughter that this is "<em><strong>the only one of its kind.</strong></em>" The <em>genes</em> is referencing <em>kind</em>, not <em>begotten</em>. It does not imply <em>begotten</em> at all. Erhman again notes that those who try to say the use of <em>monogenes </em>with "sons" intends to imply "sons" or "begottenness" have planted a seed for the refutation of that very same claim. For then it presents an "unusual kind of redundancy" -- saying "begotten" and "son" when one implies the other. This exposes the argument as obvious "special pleading." <em>Id.</em></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Likewise Laurence M. Vance, Ph.D. in his<a href="http://www.av1611.org/vance/hcsb2.html"> More About The Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) The Southern Baptist Bible </a>(accessed 10/9/2010) points out that the notion of 'begetting' is <strong><em>not expressly involved. </em></strong> Vance recognizes that <em>monogenes</em> is a compound word of monos, "only," and gevno" (genos), "kind, stock, nation." It is not from gennavw (gennao), "beget."</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">In accord with the quote of Thayer above, there is a clear contemporary understanding that this word <em>monogenes </em>means <em>unique</em>, <em>one of a kind</em>, or simply <em>only</em>. <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Many of the current handbooks on Greek syntax state that </span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>monogenes</em></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> should </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><strong>not</strong></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> be translated as </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>only begotten</em></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">. </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Instead, they take the word to mean </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>only</em></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> or </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>unique</em></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">. </span>See <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Newman and Nida, </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>A Translator's Handbook on the Gospel of John </em></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">(New York: United Bible Societies, 1980) at 24; Moulton and Milligan, </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament</em></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> (Grand Rapids: Eerdman's, 1930) at 416-417.</span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The KJV thus incorrectly renders <em>monogenes</em> as "begotten." The KJV has it as -- "the <em>only begotten</em> who came from the Father...."</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The pre-2010 NIV of John 1:14 fixed this and eliminated <em>begotten</em> and rendered it properly as <em>one and</em> <em>only</em>:</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of <strong><em>the One and Only</em></strong>,<sup>[<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201:14&version=NIV#fen-NIV-26049a" title="See footnote a">a</a>]</sup> who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">[However, the 2010 version of the NIV now reverts backwards, and replaces this with One and Only<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%201:14&version=NIV"> SON</a> even though <em>huiou</em>, Son, is not present. Incongruently, the NIV knows better for when <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>monogenuous</em> <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>huiou </em>appears </span>in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+3%3A18&version=NIV">John 3:18</a> (see<a href="http://biblos.com/john/3-18.htm"> Greek tab</a>), the NIV renders that correctly as "one and only Son," so how does it justify adding "Son" when <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>huiou</em> is not present in John 1:14? For the Greek in John 1:14 lacking <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>huiou</em></span>, see this "<a href="http://biblos.com/john/1-14.htm">Greek</a>" tab at Biblios.</span></span>]</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">In a footnote, the pre-2010 NIV points to an alternative translation possibility for (a) as: Or the Only <em><strong>Begotten</strong></em>.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">As proof of the accuracy of the pre-2010 version -- the "one and only," Hebrews 11:17 says Isaac was the <em>monogenes</em> of Abraham. But he was not indeed the only son of Abraham. There was also Judah. And Ishmael was the first born. So <em>monogenes</em> is not to be understood as "only begotten son." Rather, it means "only one" of Abraham, as the pre-2010 NIV rendered it, signifying a unique status other than sonship. (His other son Ishmael had left, so "only" Isaac was still with Abraham, and was <em>monogenes</em> -- one of a kind -- in that sense.) That is, <em>monogenes</em> could not mean there Abraham's "one and only Son" or "only begotten son" because Ishmael was Abraham's other son. Instead, the term references some unique quality and status other than a begotten sonhood.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<h2><span style="font-size: 18pt; color: #0000ff;">Why Do Some Think This Is Important?</span></h2>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Because many think John 1:14 is talking about Jesus instead of the Word. But the sentence structure makes clear that the Word is the <em>monogenes</em>. To make it sound trinitarian, this can be accomplished by changing "one and only" into "begotten" rather than allow it to simply say the Word was the "one and only."</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-size: 18pt;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">But, if "begotten" were true, then "begotten" applies to the Word which would have flaws because then John says the Word is God. If "begotten" applies to the Word, then the Word could not be "eternal" as it was "begotten" at a distinct time by the Father. How can the Word be God if it is begotten at a specific time? It could not be God as God is eternal, without beginning or end.</span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The solution is to let the Greek speak to us, and get rid of the 'begotten' error from the KJV. The expression "one and only" in John 1:14 refers to the Word, that is God, the One-and-Only God---and "became flesh," <em>i.e.</em>, entered Jesus. This Word (Logos) is not synonymous with Jesus, but instead <em><strong>indwells</strong></em> Jesus. As Jesus says "the<strong><em> Logos/Word is not min</em></strong><strong><em>e</em></strong>, but the Father's who sent Me." John 14:24. So how did the Word/Logos become flesh? Jesus answers by repeatedly saying the Father <strong><em>dwells in Himself.</em></strong> (John 14:10-11.)</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Hence, the verse John 1:14 speaks of an <strong><em>INDWELLING </em></strong>presence of the Word (the One and Only) in Jesus rather than Jesus Himself being pre-existent apart from the Father, constituting the Logos, and Himself as Logos becoming flesh. The verse is clear -- the "WORD" became flesh, and that flesh was Jesus. It is not that Jesus was begotten as the Word at some distinct time in the past, and then the Word became Jesus in the flesh. No, it is the Word became flesh -- the flesh of Jesus. A very different meaning than normally assumed due to KJV error.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<h2><span style="font-size: 18pt; color: #0000ff;">Some of the Argument Over Monogenes</span></h2>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-size: 18pt;"><strong><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Begotten Is Used To Give Jesus Pre-Existence as "Begotten Son" in 1:14</span></strong></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The author of the <em>Other Bible</em> believes instead the primary meaning of <em>monogenes</em> is <em>begotten</em> and lacks any sense of <em>only</em>. (This is an error.) This commentator says:</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">You will note that John 1:14 is translated as the "only begotten", but the<em><strong> word "only" there is an addition to the text</strong></em>. It should read "the begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He (the Father) hath declared." (Commentary on Throckmorton, <em><a href="http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/gospelhebrews-throck.html">Gospel Parallels</a></em> .)</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">This is certainly an error. "Mono" means <em>only</em>. This commentator erases what clearly is the first part of the meaning -- "only." Then this commentator wrongly insists <em>monogenes</em> only means "begotten Son." But if so, the <em>Other Bible</em> erases this says Jesus was "begotten" by God, and hence implicitly could not be God because Jesus would then be a created being -- the "begotten son." Hence, this manipulation of meaning gives Jesus pre-existence, but it does not permit Jesus to be God as the author intends because a 'begotten' being is not eternal and thus cannot be God. A wrong avenue for what these commentators seek to establish.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-size: 18pt;"><strong><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Monogenes Does Not Mean 'Begotten' or Imply Son-ship</span></strong></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Others point out that the assumed etymology of <em>monogenes</em> as partly from <em>genao </em>is wrong<em>, </em>and rather comes from <em>genus</em>, meaning <em>kind</em>. I quoted Thayer above agreeing it means <em>one and only (of its kind)</em> with no implication of <em>begotten. </em>Its usage in Hebrews 11:17 proves this, for it says Isaac was the<em> monogenes</em> of Abraham. But he was not indeed the only son of Abraham. There was also Ishmael. He was of the seed of Abraham through Hagar. (Gen. 21:9-13.) So it is not to be understood as "only begotten son." Rather, it means "only one," as the pre-2010 NIV rendered it, and thus means this Word is special and unique, but not necessarily is an offspring created by God, <em>i.e.</em>, a begotten being. This is also obvious again when "monogenes" is used in John 1:18, which is discussed below.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<h2><span style="font-size: 18pt;">Why is there any dispute?</span></h2>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The word <em>begotten</em> in the KJV led many to think Apostle John is referring to Jesus in John 1:14. (I claim <em>monogenes</em> refers to the Word.) But then if applied to Jesus, these commentators destroy their goal of claiming Jesus was God because then this means Jesus was a created ("begotten") being and hence not God.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">But then they may respond that this was 'solved' at Nicea and later by claiming Jesus is "the eternal Son." This formula was first discussed at Nicea in 325 AD and made credal in the 9th Century. But this succeeds only by <em><strong>indoctrination into the self-contradictory notion of 'begotten not made</strong></em>." Rather, once these defenders of 'begotten' admit Jesus would be a 'begotten' 'god' in John 1:14, then it is simply indoctrination to make us affix the label 'eternal Son' to somehow erase the polytheistic implication that there can be a creator God and a begotten God too.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">To erase this impact from the term <em>monogenes</em>, some have moved in the right direction, and found the meaning is just "only" and eliminated "begotten," as we saw above. (It is truly "one and only" and not 'begotten' at all.) To them, this avoids the embarassing interpretation that Jesus is the "begotten" <em>monogenes</em>. He would be a created-being, assuming "the one and only begotten" (as the KJV renders it) is a reference in John 1:14 to Jesus. (To repeat, I say it is a reference to the Word indwelling Jesus; and the Word is called simply "the one and only".)</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<h3><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><strong>Right Direction</strong></span></h3>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The <em>Twentieth Century New Testament</em>, one of the earliest translations into "modern English," was one of the first (if not the first) modern version to correctly shorten "only begotten" to "only" (or "one and only.") (John 1:14, 18, 3:16, 18; Heb. 11:17; 1 John 4:9). This change was followed by the <em>Weymouth</em> New Testament (1903), the <em>Moffatt</em> New Testament (1913), and the <em>Goodspeed</em> New Testament (1923). (Laurence M. Vance, Ph.D.<a href="http://www.av1611.org/vance/hcsb2.html"> More About The Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) The Southern Baptist Bible </a>(accessed 10/9/2010).</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Now we see it in the pre-2010 NIV as well.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">(The 2010 NIV changes this back to the KJV translation of "only begotten." )</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Vance explains how this finally came to anyone's attention, as the KJV "only begotten" translation had previously been well circulated:</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Because these versions were never very popular, it was not until the publication of the<em> Revised Standard Version</em> (RSV) New Testament in 1946 that the reading "<em><strong>only</strong></em>" was really noticed. The New Testament of the <em>New American Standard Bible</em> (NASB) of 1963, like the New Testament of its predecessor the <em>American Standard Version</em> (ASV) of 1901, did not follow this trend. However, the publication of the <em>New International Version</em> (NIV) New Testament in 1973 rekindled the debate since <strong><em>it replaced "only begotten" with "one and only."</em></strong> Recent modern versions, like the <em>New Living Translation</em> (1996) and the<em> English Standard Version</em> (2001) follow the RSV. The <em>International Standard Version</em> (1998) replaces "only begotten" with "unique" in all six passages. The <em>New Evangelical Translation</em> (1988) replaces "only begotten" with "only" in Hebrews 11:17 and "one-and-only" in the other five passages. <em>Id.</em></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<h1><span style="font-size: 18pt; color: #0000ff;"><strong>My View On Its Meaning In Context</strong></span></h1>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">In actuality the issue is not about Jesus but the WORD. <em>Monogenes </em>is a reference to the WORD.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The Word became flesh and made [his or <strong>its</strong>] dwelling among us and we have seen [his or <strong>its</strong>] glory, the glory of the one and <strong><em>only [cfr. KJV begotten]</em></strong>, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">It is clearly a reference to the WORD BECAME FLESH -- dwelling in Jesus. The Word is separate and apart from Jesus' being and becomes flesh, <em>i.e</em>., comes to dwell in Jesus.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Who also says so? Jesus. To repeat, Jesus explains that the "Logos is<strong><em> not of myself...the Logos (Word) is not mine</em></strong>, but <strong><em>the Father's</em></strong> who sent me." John <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2014:10&version=KJV">14:10</a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2014:24&version=KJV">24</a>.)</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Thus, John says we saw the GLORY of the LOGOS which belonged to the Father. Then when this verse John 1:14 speaks of the glory of the "only one," it is the glory of the LOGOS, which John later says is God.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<h2><span style="font-size: 18pt;"><strong>Why does John still call the Word God?</strong></span></h2>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The answer is simple: because the Word is inseparable from God, and thus it is impossible to distinguish the Word as a being distinct from God. It is God's mind, thoughts, etc., which eternally pre-existed. See <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+1%3A1&version=NIV">John 1:1</a> NIV.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Dr Colin Brown, systematic theologian at Fuller Theological Seminary, similarly observes in <em>Ex Auditu</em> (7, 1991):</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">It is a common but patent misreading of the opening of John’s Gospel to read it as if it said: ‘In the beginning was the Son and the Son was with God and the Son was God’ (John 1:1). What has happened here is the substitution of the Son for Word (Greek logos), and thereby the Son is made a member of the Godhead which existed from the beginning. Following carefully the thought of John’s prologue,<em><strong> it is the Word that pre-existed eternally with God and is God</strong></em>.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">From verses 1-13, we have a personification of the Word until 1:14 when it becomes flesh, and is embodied in Jesus.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">As James Dunn says in <em>Christology in the Making</em> (1980) at 243:</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The conclusion which seems to emerge from our analysis thus far is that it is only with verse 14 that we can begin to speak of the personal logos. The poem uses rather impersonal language (“became flesh”), but no Christian would fail to recognize here a reference to Jesus – the word became not flesh in general but Jesus the Christ.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Prior to verse 14 we are in the same realm as pre-Christian talk of wisdom and logos, the same language that we find in the wisdom tradition and in Philo, where as we have seen we are dealing with personifications rather than persons, personified actions of God rather than an individual divine being as such. The point is obscured by the fact that we have to translate the masculine "logos" as "He" throughout the poem.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">But if we translated "logos" as "God's utterance" instead, it would become clearer that the poem <strong><em>did not necessarily intend</em></strong> the "logos" in verses 1-13 <em><strong>to be thought of as a personal divine being</strong></em>. In other words the revolutionary significance of verse 14 may well be that it marks . . . the transition from impersonal personification to <strong><em>actual person</em></strong>.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">This transition tells us something happens when the Word becomes flesh - the personification up to that point culminates in a full indwelling presence of the Word in Jesus.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<h2><span style="font-size: 18pt;">The Arian Controversy Caused by Paul Is Different</span></h2>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">This is not the same controversy as Arius brought up about the 'first-begotten' term used by Paul in Col. 1:15 where Paul clearly is referring to Jesus. (For full discussion, see our article "<a href="/Recommended-Reading/flawedchristologyofpaul.html">Paul's Flawed Christology</a>"). The term "first-begotten" is <em>Prototokos</em> in the Greek of Col. 1:15. It is not at all like<em> monogenes</em> in John 1:14. Arius argued that Paul meant Jesus was a created being, and therefore Paul implied that Jesus could not be God. (Everyone kept missing the point; Jesus was indwelled by God the Father, and this was done by God's unique and <strong><em>only </em></strong>Word dwelling in Jesus.)</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">But Paul subtly makes one think that the first-begotten Jesus existed in heaven prior to His birth and came to reside in the flesh of what appeared to be a man. Instead, John 1:14 says the Word -- the One and Only pre-existed Jesus and came to dwell in Jesus in John 1:14.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<h2><span style="font-size: 18pt;">Did Paul Misunderstand John 1:14?</span></h2>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">In my view, Paul was confused in Col. 1:15. Paul heard about the personification of Logos prior to Jesus's birth, and thought this was Jesus somehow existing prior to His birth. This mistake is perpetuated today by many as they read John 1:14. Instead, the WORD was the one and only (<em>monogenes) </em>of God which came to DWELL in Jesus.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<hr />
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-size: 18pt;"></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<h2><span style="font-size: 18pt;">Study Notes on John 1:18 - A Modern Trinitarian Push For A Closer Verse</span></h2>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Another issue is how John 1:18 is read one way trinitarian today based upon a few manuscripts, but the traditional way, supported by most manuscripts, it does not.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The traditional version is non-trinitarian, which includes the King James which renders this as follows:</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared [him]. (John <a href="http://bible.cc/john/1-18.htm">1:18</a>, KJV) [Note this is "monogenes" Son meaning "unique / one and only" Son.]</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">This does not say Jesus is God. It says Jesus, the Son, has "declared" the Father to us.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">This form is dominant -- ASV, YLT, etc.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">However, then there is a modern change that implies Jesus is the one and only God. Listen to how the NIV changes this in its 1984 edition:</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">No one has ever seen God, but <strong><em>God the One and Only [monogenes], who is at the Father's side</em></strong>, has made him known. (John <a href="http://bible.cc/john/1-18.htm">1:18</a>, NIV)</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">This gets <em>monogenes</em> correct, but uses "God" not "Son" in the second part of the verse. This is now followed in the New American Standard but it renders 'monogenes' as 'only begotten':</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">No one has seen God at any time; the<strong><em> only begotten God</em></strong> who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Thus, Chrisitan Courier claims this proves Jesus is God:</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">In addition to the above, John refers to Christ himself as <em><strong>“the only-begotten God</strong></em>, who is at the Father’s side” (Jn. 1:18), as the language reads according to the best Greek texts (see Merrill Tenney, <em>The Expositor’s Bible Commentary,</em> Frank Gaebelein, ed, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983, Vol. 9, p. 34) ("<a href="http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/835-does-john-17-3-negate-the-deity-of-christ">Does John 17:3 Negate the Deity of Christ?</a>")</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">This has been snuck in almost unnoticed by anyone as a new and modern direct proclamation that Jesus is God in the NT. Why is this happening?</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The "<strong><em>only begotten Son</em></strong>" appears in by far the most manuscripts: <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">// </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Ò</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">:</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">@</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">@</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">(</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">,</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">¬</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">H</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">L</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Ê</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">`</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">H</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> [</span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">the only-begotten son</span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">] A C<sup>3</sup> W<sup>supp</sup> </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">)</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">1</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Q</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> 0141 <em>f</em></span><em><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> </span></em><sup><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> <em>f</em></span><em><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> </span></em><sup><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">13<
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">See <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">www.heraldmag.org/rvic/nt/28_NT_Appendix_1.doc</span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The "<strong>only begotten God</strong>" appears in far fewer: <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">is<span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> </span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">:</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">@</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">@</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">(</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">,</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">¬</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">H</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">2</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">,</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">`</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">H</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> [</span><em><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">an</span></em><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> only-begotten god</span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">] </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">p</span><sup><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">66</span></sup><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">À</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">* B C* L syr<sup>p,h</sup></span><sup><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">mg</span></sup><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> </span>geo<sup>2</sup>... // </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Ò</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">:</span></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman',
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">See <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">www.heraldmag.org/rvic/nt/28_NT_Appendix_1.doc</span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Bart Ehrman in <em>The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture</em> (Oxford University Press, 1993) at 78-79 discusses this particular issue. Ehrman supports that the majority of texts has this correct. It does not support Jesus is God. Why the change?</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The variant reading of the Alexandrian tradition which substitutes "God" for the "Son" represents an orthodox corruption of the text in which the complete deity of Christ is affirmed...Outside the Alexandrian tradition, the reading...theos [God] has not fared well. Virtually every other representative of every other textual grouping--Western, Caesarean, Byzantine--attests to [Son]. <em>Id.</em>, at 78-79.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Thus, because the "God" reading appears in only one geographical area / strain, and all other manuscripts, and quotation by Irenaeus, Clement and Tertullian say it is <em>son</em>, Erhman says it is overwhelmingly obvious that "God" is a corruption of the original verse. <em>Id.</em>, at 79. Erhman also says the Alexandrian "God" texts are implausible textually because it is an "insurmountable difficulty" to accept John called Jesus the "unique God." <em>Id.</em>, at 80. The word <em>monogenes</em> "itself embodies the notion of exclusivity conveyed by the use of the article" with it. <em>Id.</em>, at 80. This would mean Jesus is the ONLY God. Would John eject the Father? As Erhman puts it:</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The problem, of course, is that Jesus can be the unique God only if there is no other God. <em>Id.</em>, at 80.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<h2><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><strong>John 1:18 Is Mistranslated Anyway</strong></span></h2>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">In actuality, if "theos" is correct, because it says <em>monogenes theos</em>, I would translate this verse differently than the NAS and NIV. This is because it does not say "one and only<strong><em> begotten</em></strong> God," but instead "<strong><em>one and only</em></strong> God," as we explained above the meaning of <em>monogenes</em> is exclusively 'one of its kind.'</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Let's first start with a word-for-word translation of 1:18 if we assume <em>theos</em> is the true term: "God not yet has one see as? when? the one and only God the one being in the bosom of the father one who leads out." <em>Cf</em> <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">www.heraldmag.org/rvic/nt/28_NT_Appendix_1.doc</span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">So I would translate it this way:</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">No one has seen God -- the one and only God -- as the one in the bosom of the Father has revealed.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Thus, if Herald Magazine is correct -- it defends "theos" over "son" because it says the manuscripts with <em>theos </em>are superior although less in number -- it erroneously assumed monogenes means "only begotten" instead of "one and only of its kind." This makes a big difference to what <em>theos</em> (if valid) refers in the second part of John 1:18.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<h2><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><strong><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Why 'One and Only God' in 1:18: Manuscript Evidence</span></strong></span></h2>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The oldest surviving Greek manuscripts -- P66 and P75 -- of John 1:18 read <em>monogenes theos</em> (one and only God but often interpreted today as 'only begotten God'),<em> </em>not <em>only</em> <em>begotten Son</em><em>.</em></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">This is what obviously is the main reason to resurrect 'theos' as the true term in John 1:18b.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Of some significance, these two fragments from the 200s were found in Alexandria, Egypt which causes some to suspect a gnostic heresy influenced this version of John 1:18b.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">It is hard to reconcile "begotten God" with the orthodox church writings of that era except two sources in Alexandria -- one belonging clearly to a heretic.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">First, the early church sources both differed and were very varied. The oldest apparent source is Ignatius, from the 100s, who in Latin says <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><strong>"the only-begotten Son,"</strong></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> saith [the Scripture], "who is in the bosom of the Father."(</span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Ignatius, <em>Epistle to the Philippians</em>, II.)</span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> This Epistle is not considered authentic by some scholars.</span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The next oldest is Irenaeus (early 100s) who says: <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">"For "no man," he says, "hath seen God at any time," unless </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><strong>"the only-begotten Son of God</strong></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared [Him]." For He, </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><strong>the Son</strong></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> who is in His bosom, declares to all the Father who is invisible." (</span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book III, XI.)</span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Next is Tatian of 165 AD who is typically orthodox and from Syria. He had both "God" and "Son" (instead of one or the other); Tatian also had "only", but not <em>begotten</em>. In Tatian's <em>Diatessaron</em> IV:1 -- his version of John 1:18 -- it reads according to Schaff as: "No man hath seen God at any time; the <strong><em>only Son, God</em></strong>, which is in the bosom of his Father, he hath told of him." See this <a href="http://www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/03d/0112-0185,_Tatianus_Syriacus,_Diatesseron_%5BSchaff%5D,_EN.pdf">link</a>. </span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Incidentally, this could also be translated "No man has ever seen God, the only God. The Son who is in the bosom of the Father told of Him." Thus, this has "God" and "Son" in the same text, but lacks "begotten." As I translate it, it says very much what the KJV says unlike the Trinitarian reading preferred by the NIV of 2010.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Next, the first step toward "begotten God" appears in the writings of the heretic <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Valentinus (second century) who has "begotten God." In fact, he is suspected as the source of the P75 manuscript as a deliberate fabrication. (Burgon (1896).) Burgon revived attention to a passage in </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Theodotus (400s) quoting Valentinus from the 2nd century as a corrupting heretic. R. P. Casey (1934) translates Theodotus as follows: </span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"></span>The verse, "in the beginning was the Logos and the Logos was with God and the Logos was God," the Valentinians understand thus, for they say that "the beginning" is the "Only Begotten" and that he is also called God, as also in the verses which immediately follow it explains that he is God, for it says, "The <strong><em>Only-Begotten God</em></strong> who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him." (69)</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">So here we see a heretic added the word "begotten God" and made this refer to Jesus as God. It precisely is the same as the phrase in P75. Bear in mind a scribal error could also be involved, because the difference between "Son" (heios) and "God" (theos) in Greek is a single letter.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Next is <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Clement of Alexandria (215 AD). He reads identical to that of Valentinus. See </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, Book I, ch. III.</span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">But Tertullian ca. 220 AD has the same reading as Ignatius: "<span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><strong>the only begotten Son</strong></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">, who is in the bosom of the Father, and has Himself declared Him." </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Tertullian, <em>Against Praxeas</em>, XV. So too Origen in the 200s; Hippolytus in the 200s and then from that point on it always reads "begotten Son" in Latin texts.</span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">So there are only 2 writers who agree with "only begotten God" and these are the heretic Valentinus of Alexandria and Clement of Alexandria. Tatian's version is not compatible with either. And it appears no coincidence P75 and P66 were found in Alexandria from the same period. It is evident that this was a local corruption -- either doctrinally or by misreading 'heios" as "theos" - a one letter difference.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<h2><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><strong><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Consequence of Accepting P75/P66 And Keeping 'Begotten" Reading of Monogenes</span></strong></span></h2>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">If we reject this translation of <em>monogenes</em>, and accept the NIV and NAS versions which render "monogenes" as "only begotten," and <em>theos</em> is the correct manuscript version, we end up in <strong><em>a terrible polytheistic heresy</em></strong> that goes beyond trinitarianism.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Dr. Holland who wishes to defend <em>monogenes</em> means "only begotten" laments if <em>theos</em> were the valid manuscript that this would lead to a gross heresy of polytheism. Dr. Holland comments in <em>Crowned with Glory</em> (2000):</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">It is also interesting to note that the <em>New World Translation</em> of the Jehovah's Witnesses also uses the phrase <em>only begotten god</em>. This is, of course, in line with their teaching that<strong><em> Christ is a created god</em></strong>. Once we accept the reading <em><strong>only begotten god</strong></em>, we have opened the door to reinterpret all other verses concerning the deity of Jesus Christ. (Fn. 3, excerpted <a href="http://av1611.com/kjbp/faq/holland_joh1_18.html#_ftn3">here</a>.)</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Another source correctly analyzes the NASB's use of "begotten" God found also in the NWT. The author says that this would necessitate there is one visible God and one invisible God - polytheism:</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">The error here is with the idea of multiple "gods.".... <strong>John</strong> <strong>1:18</strong> makes no sense in the NASB unless it refers to multiple, separate "gods." In fact, the verse contradicts itself. In the NASB, it is clear from the language that two individual beings are described here, the invisible "God" and the visible "God." Both are called "God." "No man has seen God" refers to the unseen God. But, the words, "the only begotten God" refer to the one who has been seen by men. Literally understood, the NASB is speaking of two distinct "Gods," one visible and one invisible. Furthermore, the use of "only begotten" (mono-genes) with "God" (theos) implies birth or reproduction of the second "God" by the first "God." The NASB's rendering here is absolutely ridiculous and completely heterodoxical. <a href="http://www.studytoanswer.net/bibleversions/john1n18.html#02">(Study to Answer</a>.)</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">In other words, why aren't we all created gods? <strong><em>Polytheism becomes implicit in any notion that God can be begotten</em></strong>. Thus, Dr. Holland argues that <em>theos</em> was likely a scribe who wished to insert <strong><em>an heretical notion that God could be begotten as God</em></strong>, which would support the gnostic heresy of the 2d-3d centuries. But I contend that even if<em> theos</em> were in the original manuscript, it still does not mean <em>begotten</em> and can be read properly that Jesus revealed "the one and only God" to us.</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<h2><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><strong><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Once John 1:14 Is Fixed, John 1:1 No Longer Holds Trinitarian Implication</span></strong></span></h2>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+1%3A1&version=NIV">John 1:1</a>, we read:</span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="margin-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"></span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">In the beginning was the Word,</span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> and the Word was with God,</span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> and the Word was God.</span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">This does not say Jesus is God unless one equates Jesus with the Word -- the Greek word LOGOS. But many insist the Logos is Jesus, and thus John 1:1 supposedly proves Jesus is God. For example, we read under "Jesus is Called God" in <a href="http://www.biblelessons.com/jesus.html">this article</a> that: </span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="margin-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">"John 1:1 'the Word' (</span><em style="color: #000000; font-family: Verdana; font-size: small; line-height: normal;">logos</em><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">-context shows this to refer to Jesus) was God (</span><em style="color: #000000; font-family: Verdana; font-size: small; line-height: normal;">theos</em><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">)"</span></span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">What context has driven the notion that the Word -- the Logos -- is Jesus? </span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">It is John 1:14, depending on how you translate </span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>monogenes, </em>as either "only begotten" or as "one and only." For if <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>monogenes</em> is "only begotten" in 1:14, this makes the "God" --- the Logos of 1:1 -- become Jesus, the begotten Son of God. But if <em>monogenes</em> is "one and only," then the Word is simply God indwelling Jesus, as 1:14 otherwise would simply state.</span></span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="margin-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">The true meaning of <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>monogenes</em> is virtually self-evident. Without knowing Greek, we k</span>now God is eternal and could not be referred to as a begotten being. That is the first and most obvious reason <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><em>monogenes</em> is not to be understood as "only begotten" in 1:14. But further, its word meaning in Greek is simply "one and only" or "unique." The only reason that Christians identified Jesus as the Logos (Word) -- and thus having a pre-existence as God -- was the erroneous translation in 1:14 that the Word was "begotten" instead of was the "one and only" -- meaning the Word was the one true God. When that is cleared away, God is indeed the LOGOS ... the Word, and is the "one and only" God. There is no pre-existence intended for Jesus, but rather a pre-existence was intended for the LOGOS -- God who in 1:14 we learn dwells in Jesus. Nothing more in the "context" is implied. </span></span></span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"></span></span></span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<hr />
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><strong><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Study Notes</span></strong></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-size: 18pt;"></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Also, please note Jesus is "called" the Word of God in <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+19%3A13&version=ERV">Revelation 19:13</a>. This is not the same as saying that Jesus IS the Word of God. In Hebrew names, if read literally, Yah is part of their name and would signify the person is God. This is how you know a name in Hebrew is symbolic, and not actual. Jesus embodies and symbolizes the Word of God. This is not the same as saying Jesus IS the Word of God.</span></span></span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p> </p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">At one point, when God tells Abraham to sacrifice Isaac (as a test of his willingness to obey), God refers to Isaac as Abraham's "only son." (Gen. <a href="http://biblehub.com/genesis/22-2.htm">22:2</a>.) (This is a Hebrew term, so it has no relevance to how the Greek <em>monogenes </em>was used in Hebrews 11:17.)</span></span></span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Is this inconsistent with Ishmael also being a son? Yes, unless this meant his "only son" by Sarah, as some interpret it.</span></span></span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">For Ishmael was actually the first son of Abraham. This happened 16 years prior to the command to sacrifice Isaac, Ishmael was born to Abraham's maidservant, Hagar. (Gen. 16:1-4.)</span></span></span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Thus, the Pulpit Commentary resolves the issue by saying "only son" in Gen. 22:2 means "only" legitimate son, or "only son" still with him, as Ishmael went away with Hagar:</span></span></span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p style="margin-left: 30px;"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">thine only son</span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> - not [only begotten in Greek</span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> (LXX.), but</span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">unigenitum</span><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"> (Vulgate), meaning the only son of Sarah, the only legitimate offspring he possessed, the only heir of the promise, the only child that remained to him after Ishmael's departure. (See <a href="http://biblehub.com/genesis/22-2.htm">Gen. 22:2 - Pulpit Commentary</a>.)</span></span></span></span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-size: 18pt;"></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<hr />
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1">Liddell Scott defined <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=monogenou%3Ds&la=greek&can=monogenou%3Ds0&prior=tou=&d=Perseus:text:1999.01.0155:book=John:chapter=3:verse=18&i=1#lexicon">monogenous</a> as </span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-size: 18pt;"></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<div class="lex_sense lex_sense1" style="margin: 10px auto; color: #000000; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: medium; line-height: normal;"><span style="font-size: 18pt;"><em>the only member of a kin</em> or <em>kind</em>: hence, generally, <em>only, single</em>, “<span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=pai%3Ds&la=greek&can=pai%3Ds0&prior=ge/nos" target="morph">????</a></span>” <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:abo:tlg,0020,002:376&lang=original" target="_new">Hes.<span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Op.</span>376</a>, <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:abo:tlg,0016,001:7:221&lang=original" target="_new">Hdt.7.221</a>, cf. <strong><a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:abo:tlg,0031,004:1:14&lang=original" target="_new"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Ev.Jo.</span>1.14</a></strong>,<em>Ant.Lib.32.1</em>; of Hecate, <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:abo:tlg,0020,001:426&lang=original" target="_new">Hes. <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Th.</span>426</a>.</span></div>
|
||
|
|
<div class="lex_sense lex_sense3" style="margin-top: 3px; margin-bottom: 3px; margin-left: 100px; color: #000000; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: medium; line-height: normal;"><span style="font-size: 18pt;"><strong>2.<a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/submitvote?type=sense&lexquery=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=monogenh/s&doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0155&subquery=entry=monogenh/s&form=monogenou=s&which=1&sense_id=n68501.1&lang=en" style="font-size: small; color: blue;"> [select] </a></strong><em>unique</em>, of <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=to%5C&la=greek&can=to%5C0&prior=pai=s" target="morph">??</a> <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=o%29%2Fn&la=greek&can=o%29%2Fn0&prior=to\" target="morph">??</a></span>, <em>Parm. 8.4</em>; “<span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=ei%28%3Ds&la=greek&can=ei%28%3Ds0&prior=o)/n" target="morph">???</a> <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=o%28%2Fde&la=greek&can=o%28%2Fde0&prior=ei(=s" target="morph">???</a> <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=m&la=greek&can=m0&prior=o(/de" target="morph">?</a>. <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=ou%29rano%5Cs&la=greek&can=ou%29rano%5Cs0&prior=m" target="morph">???????</a> <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=gegonw%2Fs&la=greek&can=gegonw%2Fs0&prior=ou)rano\s" target="morph">???????</a></span>” <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:abo:tlg,0059,031:31b&lang=original" target="_new">Pl.<span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Ti.</span>31b</a>, cf. <em>Procl.<span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Inst.</span>22</em>; “<span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=qeo%5Cs&la=greek&can=qeo%5Cs0&prior=gegonw/s" target="morph">????</a> <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=o%28&la=greek&can=o%280&prior=qeo\s" target="morph">?</a> <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=m&la=greek&can=m1&prior=o(" target="morph">?</a>.</span>”<em><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Sammelb.</span>4324.15</em>.</span></div>
|
||
|
|
<div class="lex_sense lex_sense3" style="margin-top: 3px; margin-bottom: 3px; margin-left: 100px; color: #000000; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: medium; line-height: normal;"><span style="font-size: 18pt;"><strong>3.<a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/submitvote?type=sense&lexquery=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=monogenh/s&doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0155&subquery=entry=monogenh/s&form=monogenou=s&which=1&sense_id=n68501.2&lang=en" style="font-size: small; color: blue;"> [select] </a></strong><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=m&la=greek&can=m2&prior=m" target="morph">?</a>. <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=ai%28%3Dma&la=greek&can=ai%28%3Dma0&prior=m" target="morph">????</a></span> <em>one and the same</em> blood, dub. l. in <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Eur.%20Hel.%201685&lang=original" target="_new">E. <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Hel.</span>1685</a>.</span></div>
|
||
|
|
<div class="lex_sense lex_sense3" style="margin-top: 3px; margin-bottom: 3px; margin-left: 100px; color: #000000; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: medium; line-height: normal;"><span style="font-size: 18pt;"><strong>4.<a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/submitvote?type=sense&lexquery=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=monogenh/s&doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0155&subquery=entry=monogenh/s&form=monogenou=s&which=1&sense_id=n68501.3&lang=en" style="font-size: small; color: blue;"> [select] </a></strong>Gramm., <em>having one form for all genders</em>, <em>A.D.<span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">Adv.</span> 145.18</em>.</span></div>
|
||
|
|
<div class="lex_sense lex_sense3" style="margin-top: 3px; margin-bottom: 3px; margin-left: 100px; color: #000000; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: medium; line-height: normal;"><span style="font-size: 18pt;"><strong>5.<a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/submitvote?type=sense&lexquery=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=monogenh/s&doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0155&subquery=entry=monogenh/s&form=monogenou=s&which=1&sense_id=n68501.4&lang=en" style="font-size: small; color: blue;"> [select] </a></strong>name of the foot<span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1">___<a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=%5E&la=greek&can=%5E0&prior=ai(=ma" target="morph">^</a></span>, <em>Heph.3.3</em>.</span></div>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"></span></span></span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"></span></span></span></span></p>
|
||
|
|
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times; font-size: 18pt;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;" data-mce-mark="1"></span></span></span></p>
</td>
|
||
|
|
</tr>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</table>
|
||
|
|
<span class="article_separator"> </span>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</td>
|
||
|
|
</tr>
|
||
|
|
</table>
|
||
|
|
<div class="bottom_top"></div>
|
||
|
|
<div id="bottom">
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
<div id="footer"><strong>Content View Hits</strong> : 10974112<br />
|
||
|
|
<script type="text/javascript">
|
||
|
|
var pv = new Array(1,0,0,0,1);
|
||
|
|
var trdlname = "/downloads";
|
||
|
|
//<![CDATA[
|
||
|
|
var regex = /\.(?:doc|eps|jpg|png|svg|xls|ppt|pdf|xls|zip|txt|vsd|vxd|js|css|rar|exe|wma|mov|avi|wmv|mp3)($|\&|\?)/;
|
||
|
|
//]]>
|
||
|
|
var trlkname = "/external/";
|
||
|
|
var trmlname = "/mailto/";
|
||
|
|
</script>
|
||
|
|
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/modules/mod_analytics/gatr.js"></script>
|
||
|
|
<script type="text/javascript">
|
||
|
|
var gaJsHost = (("https:" == document.location.protocol) ? "https://ssl." : "http://www.");
|
||
|
|
document.write(unescape("%3Cscript src='" + gaJsHost + "google-analytics.com/ga.js' type='text/javascript'%3E%3C/script%3E"));
|
||
|
|
</script>
|
||
|
|
<script type="text/javascript">
|
||
|
|
try {
|
||
|
|
var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker("UA-3747914");
|
||
|
|
pageTracker._initData();
|
||
|
|
pageTracker._trackPageview();
|
||
|
|
} catch(err) {}
|
||
|
|
</script>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
<div class="copyright"></div>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
</body>
|
||
|
|
</html>
|