ONLY BEGOTTEN OR ETERNALLY BE-GOTTEN?
We do not contend against or question the eternal Sonship of Christ, for we believe it with all our heart if not fully deceived. Christ is the eternal Son of God. Many texts make this amply evident. The question to be asked is, if Christ, the eternal Son of God, is the only begotten or the eternally begotten Son of God? The difference is incalculable. Consider: many Scriptures refer to Christ as God; co-equal with God the Father, and one with the Father in power, glory, wisdom. We give several. "For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Colossians 2.9)." "And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one." (John 17.22) "I and my Father are one." (John 10.30) However, if Christ became the Son of God by eternal begetting, there are at least two major problems to confront. The first is, how can Christ be eternally begotten and at the same time be, in all respects, one with, and equal to, the Father? Does the word begotten, as used in the Scriptures, anywhere agree with any meaning necessary to suggest an eternal begetting of Christ? Christ is, after all, God, and is at the same time one with the Father, underived, solitary, and everlastingly unchangeable. Moreover, does a text exist suggesting in any way there was an eternal begetting? We ask not for a specific text; even one containing implied evidence of such will do. Only begotten, yes. First begotten, yes. Eternally begotten, never! We mention as well that those contending the Son was eternally begotten usually describe this begetting as an eternal generation, a view fully as troubling as eternal begetting. Many espousing an eternal begetting sometimes confess correctly they are but attempting to put the doctrine they profess into acceptable words. They should, nevertheless, be able to satisfy dissent from their view. It appears they are dressing a non-existent doctrine with accommodating language.
The second major problem is, if it is assumed Christ was eternally begotten, but the Scriptures give us clear evidence of an obviously different meaning of His begetting, then we cannot avoid concluding-either eternal begetting is wrong, or there must be two begettings of our Lord. Worse still, the erroneous interpretation, based on assumption, would obscure the true interpretation, causing considerable confusion about what the Word of God says on the issue.
Any interpretation of Scriptures suggesting an eternal begetting is without proof. Proponents of eternal begetting are more likely to quote the views of other writers than to attempt to prove their assumption from the Word of God when asked for proof of the doctrine they profess.
If the Lord enables, we shall show the Scriptural meaning of Christ's begetting contrasted with the assumption of eternal begetting, and hopefully put to rest both of the problems arising from the idea.
PSALM 2.7
"I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee." (Psalm 2.7)
This verse contains the only direct reference in the Old Testament to the begetting of the Son of God. If there are others, direct or indirect, we have not found them. Thus, it is vital to our current study. The New Testament reveals considerable about the begetting of the Lord, and it will be made evident in due time.
Any interpretation of Psalm 2.7 must be in harmony with whatever truth on the subject is revealed there.
There are other texts, but Psalm 2.7 could stand alone to establish forever that Jesus the Christ is the Son of God and King in Zion. But again, a question must be asked: if Jesus Christ is truly the Son of God, and His begetting was not eternal, then when did He become the Son of God? Answer: Jesus never became the Son of God; He always was the Son of God, even from everlasting. Psalm 2.7 establishes that Jesus Christ is and was, not shall become, the Son of God, and there was a day (mark well, a day) when He was begotten by God. Additionally, the Son of God, speaking in this verse, says He would declare the decree. So then, there was a decree-Jesus would be begotten of the Father and He, Jesus, would declare it. The decrees are eternal and this decree is no exception. But-if the Son of God was generated eternally-of what use was any decree which clearly spoke of God's purpose for a begetting yet to come? Obviously there would be no need for a decree to be declared if the event
was eternally past. The New Testament verses relative to Psalm 2.7 shall clarify, the Lord willing, how Christ declared the decree, and what He declared.
IS THERE A HOLY SPIRIT BEGETTING?
Passing from eternal begetting, neither can it be argued successfully that Jesus was begotten by the Holy Ghost in the womb of Mary. This view, while not as prominent as eternal begetting, has its few supporters. But whatever else may be known (or not known) on the subject, the idea of the Holy Ghost being the Father of the child Jesus should be discarded. Could God the Father be the Father if the Holy Spirit was responsible for the generation or begetting of Jesus? That would make the Holy Spirit the Father. This notion is so strained, the difficulty is obvious. It is most perplexing to think anyone could believe it. Attempting to find somewhere to apply the fulfillment of Psalm 2.7, some, nevertheless, do believe the Holy Ghost begat Jesus.
An examination of Luke's record recounting Mary's conception is revealing, both for what is told, and what is not told. It was told in positive tones that Mary would conceive, and how, but there was nowhere a mention of begetting.
"And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. And behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end." (Luke 1.30-33)
Mary was eternally chosen to bear the Christ-child, for no other reason than God's good pleasure, thus fulfilling the prophesy of Isaiah 7.14. It certainly was a great display of grace and blessing from God in choosing Mary to carry the body of Jesus in her womb, but the eternal Will of God, alone, directed the choice of this maiden. She was in every respect, with all other women, a fallen daughter of Adam.
"Thou shalt conceive in thy womb" offers no hint Mary's conception was by a Holy Ghost begetting. Her conception was no different from any other conception when a woman knows a man, with this exception-she never knew a man. There is no contradiction here, even when the pronouncement of the angel to Joseph in Matthew 1 .18-20 is compared. First, it was written that Mary "was found with child of the Holy Ghost." Then it was told Joseph, "for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost," not meaning the Holy Ghost would be the father of the Christ-child. Rather, His coming upon Mary would empower her to bear a son, even in her virginity, for it could not possibly be accomplished by human means. The Holy Ghost, One with the Father and the Son, in power, purpose, and wisdom, came upon the virgin to render her, not only capable, but certain to conceive, for no reason other than it was the Will of God, executed.
"And bring forth a son" indicated that, beyond the miracle of conception without knowing man, Mary's deliverance of the child would be as ordinary as all other births, except that she had prior knowledge the child would be a son. "And shalt call his name JESUS" sets the seal to God's total control over this sacred event, even to giving the child His human name and title.
"He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest" denotes the supreme elevation and station to which Jesus would rise-both in greatness and favor. As the Son of the Highest, nothing less could be possible. Comparing the expression, the Highest, with the angel's earlier salutation to Mary, "Hail, thou that art highly favoured" compels acknowledgment that Mary's favor was the ultimate favor-as none other than the Highest bestowed it upon her. The child was to be named Jesus, but He was to be called the Son of the Highest, for He was truly and manifestly the Son of the Highest. Mark well: Jesus did not become the Son of the Highest by being born of the virgin. He Who was to be born of the virgin was called the Son of the Highest because He was eternally the Son of the Highest. It would be doctrine of the most dangerous sort to suggest Jesus became the Son of the Highest by His birth. To establish this point we need look no farther than the profound prophecy of Isaiah regarding Jesus: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."(Isaiah 9.6) A child was born, and at the same time the child was born, a son was also given. The child born of Mary was also the Son of God given for the redemption of His elect. But, should that not satisfy the doubter, there is more: He, the Son that was given, was also "The mighty God; The everlasting Father!" Surely the Son given could then be none other than God with us! Jesus was God, Who is eternal. He was the Son of God, so again He must be eternal. And yet for all this, there is nothing here to suggest to us the meaning of begetting as recorded in Psalm 2.7.
SCRIPTURE USE OF THE WORD, BEGOTTEN
The word begotten is used sufficiently in Scriptures to establish an unmistakable meaning of the word as well as its pattern of usage. Begotten is found nine times in the Old Testament and the usage is consistent with the idea of procreation, generating life, or a bringing forth. Sometimes, begotten and other related words are used figuratively, but the core idea of the life process remains, nevertheless. We offer the following interesting example from Job, adding bold face type for emphasis:
"Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten the drops of dew? Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it?" (Job 38.28, 29)
The words, father, womb, and gendered, in association with begotten make it perfectly clear how the word begotten is used in the Old Testament. It is also consistent with New Testament usage.
In the New Testament begotten is found fifteen times, and at least nine of those times it is used of Jesus Christ as the begotten of God. The first four times begotten is used (John 1.14; 1.18; 3.16; 3.18), it is associated with the word only; and in each of these texts except John 1.14, the phrase only begotten Son is employed. In John 1.14 the wording is only begotten of the Father. I John 4.9 also uses the expression only begotten Son. Only begotten son is found also in Hebrews 11.17 where it speaks of Abraham offering up Isaac. There are many fruitful thoughts to be gleaned from a comparison of Abraham and God offering up their sons. We suggest the reader reflect seriously thereon.
An examination of several texts in order to gain a clear view of how Jesus is the begotten Son of God should prove profitable. In the first of these texts the word begotten relates to, not the oneness of Jesus Christ and the Father in eternity, not the conception in the womb of Mary, but His resurrection from the dead. "And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood (Revelation 1.5)." Here in this last reference in the Scriptures to Jesus as the begotten, He is described as the first begotten of the dead. Elsewhere, He is said to be the firstborn from the dead (Colossians 1.18). It cannot be stressed too strongly then-if Jesus Christ is the first begotten from the dead His resurrection constitutes a begetting. It really does not matter what extraneous efforts are made to nullify the force of this conclusion; if the resurrection of Jesus Christ was a begetting, and it was, then unless He was begotten more than once, we have a time frame and a specific incident with which to identify Psalm 2.7 where God said, "Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee."
Does not the resurrection from the dead meet all the figures used in Job 38.28, 29? The words were, father, begotten, womb, and gendered. First, it was by the power and pleasure of the Father that Jesus came again from the regions of the dead. Second, the begetting was a bringing forth; Jesus was brought forth or begotten from the bowels of the hidden regions of the earth. Third, the womb of the morning broke (Psalm 110. 3) so that the Son of Righteousness might arise with healing in His wings (Malachi 4.2). Finally, as Sinai gendereth to bondage (Galatians 4.24), so Jerusalem the mother of us all, and embodied in the resurrected Jesus, gendered to freedom from hell, death, and the grave.
In Acts 13.14-43, we have the protected account of Paul's discourse at Antioch in Pisidia. It is important to mention that this was the first recorded discourse of Paul after he had been set apart to the work of the gospel. The contents of this message are thus of great importance. Paul recited the travels of Israel, beginning with their bondage in Egypt and continuing to the resurrection of our Lord. From that discourse, reflect carefully on the text following: "But God raised him from the dead: And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people. And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee."(Acts 13.30-33) This absolutely ties the begotten of the 2nd Psalm with the resurrection of Jesus.
Despite all the malice and rage of His enemies, God raised Jesus from the dead for, "He, whom God raised again, saw no corruption."(Acts 13.37) This is a critical point, for had Jesus been subject to corruption, He would have been no better than David who prophesied of His resurrection. Jesus was begotten from the dead, for He alone was worthy. Only Jesus was God's Son, and only God's Son could fulfill the Will of the Father in the conquest of death. This victory neither men or angels were capable of gaining. "For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee?" (Hebrews 1.5)
It cannot be stressed too strongly; Paul emphatically associated the resurrection of Jesus from the dead with the declaration from Psalm 2.7, "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee." The language cannot be mistaken. It may be denied, or deemed of little consequence by those too hardened to yield to light, but Paul said in forcible and positive tones: God made a promise to the fathers; He fulfiIled it unto us, their children, by raising Jesus from the dead on the third day and accomplished what David wrote in the Psalm respecting His only begotten Son, Jesus.
How sublime! How profound yet plain! There is no need for the tortured interpretations of Mother Babylon's disciples; Jesus was begotten from the dead thus bringing to pass all that was written on His begetting. There is no need for airy flights into vague theological high places to find a meaning to fit the words of Psalm 2.7. No one need any more to look curiously at the moving of the Holy Spirit on Mary and wrestle with the frightful idea that Mary's conception was somehow a Spirit begetting. The confusing idea of Jesus somehow being eternally begotten and yet still one with the Father may also be dismissed. God, the eternal Father, owned the work of His eternal Son; and in fulfillment of the everlasting covenant, raised Jesus from the dead, saying, "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee." What day was that? It was the day marking the new dispensation; the day signaling the end of the former days and the beginning of the latter days (last days, Hebrews 1.2); it was as well the morning of the third day when Jesus was to rise from the tomb.
The expression, "I will declare the decree" from Psalm 2, will be covered in another article if the Lord spares us to write again. Additionally, several texts from the New Testament (John 1.14; 3.16,18; Hebrews 5.5; I John 4.9) relating to the begetting of the Lord that might seem difficult to harmonize with Acts 13 will be covered as well.
THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD
"I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee." (Psalm 2.7)
Though crucified and buried, Jesus was raised from the dead. This may be considered the greatest of all miracles and the core doctrine of the believer's faith. The Apostle Paul affirmed the resurrection of our Lord in the most positive tone possible: "But God raised him from the dead." (Acts 13.30) Nothing could be plainer-the Son of God, having assumed a body of flesh, died, yet He lives-He was raised from the dead by the power of His Father.
In our last article on this subject we affirmed this position-the resurrection of Jesus from the dead was the fulfilling of the text above, "I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee." It is not our aim in this article to review the wise purposes of God in decreeing the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. It is worth mention, though, that from eternity past the Will of God was that Jesus would satisfy the demands of the law. The elect could not satisfy its demands, nor was that ever the purpose of God. Jesus would suffer in their place as their eternal sacrifice and substitute, be buried to put away all their sins from view, rise for their justification, and be seated at the right hand of His Father as mediator for the elect forever. All of this certainly necessitated the begetting of Jesus from the dead, for He was not only the eternal Son of God, but the Elder Brother of all the elect family. They were His responsibility; their security rested in His success. His success rested in the Father's begetting Him from the dead.
Briefly, we shall review the meaning of the words, "I will declare the decree," appraise the importance placed on the resurrection of Jesus in the Apostles' early ministry, and finally examine the several texts relating to the begetting of Jesus, the Son of God.
"I WILL DECLARE THE DECREE"
There is no room for vain speculation in applying the language of Psalm 2. The Holy Spirit has clearly applied the Psalm to the events surrounding the trials, death and resurrection of our Lord. How does Psalm 2 open? "Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us." (Psalm 2.1-3) This quotation is positively applied in the New Testament as follows: "And being let go, they went to their own company, and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said unto them. And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is: Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, for to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done." (Acts 4.23-28)
Psalm 2 is without doubt a vivid reference describing the grand spectrum of events leading to the ascension of Jesus to the right hand of the Father. Thus we find the proper time frame wherein to ascribe the expression of our Lord, "I will declare the decree."
"What is the decree the Lord said He would declare?" someone may ask. Well, if you believe God moved David to write in Psalm 2.7 with a continuity of thought, then the decree was exactly what followed when he quoted Jesus as saying He would declare it- "The Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee." That expression is the decree the Lord said He would (and did) declare.
It may again be asked, when did Jesus declare this decree, before or after He was raised from the dead? We respond firmly, after the resurrection, not before. Before the raising of Jesus from the dead there was considerable question respecting His Sonship. The religious rabble constantly quarreled with everything said by the Lord or His disciples that might in any way be construed as affirming Jesus was the Son of God and one with the Father. The whole of the books of Luke and John abound with such controversies. When it is recognized that the resurrection of Jesus was the very affirmation of God that Jesus was His Son and that He was that day begetting Him from the dead, the notion that He would have declared the decree before the resurrection simply evaporates.
There are several corresponding texts which shed light on the declaration of Jesus that as God's Son He was begotten from the dead. The first is found in that storehouse of sublime truths, Isaiah chapter 53. It comes in the form of a question. "He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken (Isaiah 53.8ff)." Indeed, who was there to declare a generation that appeared to be lost due to the cruel death of the Man of Sorrows? He was cut off from out of the land of the living. Seemingly, He left no seed. His house, to all appearance, was barren. Having no wife or properties, a kinsman-redeemer would benefit Him nothing. There was none to declare His generation, to revive or pronounce it alive and well, but one-that was Himself! God had decreed, and Jesus would declare, His Sonship by being the firstborn from the dead (Colossians 1.18). To this perfectly agree the words of John the Apostle: "And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood."(Revelation 1.5) From this full text, we draw two vital truths, though many more could be extracted. First, as Paul described Jesus as the firstborn from the dead, here John portrayed Him as the first begotten of the dead, showing both expressions to be the same. A birth and a begetting both answer to the same thing; a bringing forth of life from the bowels of death. Second, our Lord was described by John as the faithful witness. Blessedly yes, Jesus was and is faithful in all respects and witnessed to the Father's Will in yielding up His life in a voluntary dying. Furthermore, He was a faithful witness to the power of the Father to raise Him from the tomb as covenanted, and from the tomb He did arise. He declared (witnessed) the decree and emblazoned the universe with the truth of it when the foul regions released Him to the Father's begetting. None other could declare this decree but He Who would rise in victory. And He did!
It is imperative that it be kept in mind that as Jesus was the firstborn and the first begotten from the dead then there must be others to follow; else there could be no first. This answers to the inquiry, "Who shall declare his generation?" from Isaiah 53.8. When Jesus declared Himself the Father's Son, begotten from the dead, He as well declared the whole of His generation with Him, the entire family of the redeemed. Scriptures to support this truth abound and are no doubt familiar to the readers.
THE APOSTLES AFFIRM THE RESURRECTION
Were there only one or two Scriptures addressing the theme of the resurrection, it would still command our close attention; however, there abounds in the early witness of the Apostles their firm conviction that the begetting of Jesus from the dead was the cornerstone of the Gospel. One example: "For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures." ICorinthians 15.3,4ff) It is worthy of notice that Paul appeals to the New Testament Scriptures to buttress his declaration. Additionally, it commands our attention that Paul attests to the resurrection "first of all."
That the resurrection was a vital, even major, component of the early Gospel message will be clear to any that may search the Acts of the Apostles. If it be remembered that the resurrection was described by Paul as the begetting of the Son of God (Acts 13.33), the eagerness of the Apostles to affirm this blessed moment comes to focus.
Following are some of the early testimonies to the resurrection:
The Pentecost Message
"Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it (Acts 2.23, 24)." Thus begins a series of pronouncements that God honored the work of Jesus in His life and death and raised Him from the dead as promised in the everlasting covenant. Notice: if it was not possible for Jesus to be held by death, as Acts 2 clearly states, then the begetting of Jesus from the dead must have been an eternal certainty. Why else would God deliver His Son by His determinate counsel and foreknowledge if any possibility existed the covenant would fail?
The Pentecost Message Continued
"Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses (Acts 2.30-32)." It is extremely important to recognize that since God had sworn with an oath to David that He would raise Jesus from the dead- His begetting- then it must come to pass, or else the Word of Oath from God would be as unreliable as mere mans' oath. Moreover, if God swore to raise Jesus from the dead, then Jesus must first die; thus, all the scope of what Peter proclaimed on the day of Pentecost was absolutely predestinated. If not predestinated, what assurance could David have that God would perform what He related to him by oath? To attempt to assign some other name to the making certain God's oath will not change the fact that God eternally willed the trial, death, burial, and ultimately the begetting of Jesus, just as all transpired, with no shade of variation.
At the Temple
"But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you; And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses." (Acts3.14,15) It is little wonder that God must raise Jesus from the dead as His only begotten Son? According to the testimony affirmed by Peter, Jesus was, first, the Holy One; second, the Just; and third, the Prince of Life. Death could never hold One Whose names were so exalted and Who was indeed worthy of such titles. Marvelous it is to follow then the remarkable record of inspiration as it reveals the importance of the begetting-resurrection of Jesus from the dead.
Before the Sanhedrin
"Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner." (Acts 4.10,11) Peter, in a matter-of-fact manner, asserts it was Jesus "whom God raised from the dead." Of particular notice here- Peter associates the resurrected One as the prophesied stone of Psalm 118.22: "The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner." And that which even further confirms the saint's faith in this blessed resurrection is the following: "This is the Lord's doing; it is marvelous in our eyes." (Psalm 118.23) If words have meaning, we are told by the Psalmist that the Sanhedrin's refusal of Christ as the chief cornerstone, which resulted in His being put to death, was the Lord's doing! No wonder then there was such an uproar when Peter and the others took such a stand. They were filling Jerusalem with this Absolute doctrine!
The Church Alone in Prayer
"And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all." (Acts 4.33) What were the Apostles doing but laying their veracity on the line? They said, in effect, "We were there; we saw the empty tomb." "We saw the resurrected Jesus as begotten from the dead; we held His body, saw His wounds, and observed His glory." From this text it appears the Holy Spirit greatly blessed their witness and owned their testimony. The church was evidently blessed in great measure upon hearing so profound a testimony of the raising from the dead of the Son of God.
What is vital to see here is the Apostle's interjecting the theme of the resurrected Jesus in the middle of the disciples' giving up their possessions for the common good of the church. Read verse 32 of Acts 4, then skip to verse 34, 35 and read them in conjunction with verse 32. There is a perfect continuity of thought without verse 33. But, verse 33 is there; right in the middle. Obviously the message of the only begotten Son of God, Who came forth from the dead, was vital to establish the early conduct of the church. Why else would the thoughts of verse 33 be included?
Released from Prison
"Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins." (Acts 5.29-31) Many have marveled at the bold expression of the apostles, "We ought to obey God rather than men," but it is clear as crystal what motivated their conduct at this delicate juncture. Jesus, their Lord and Master, had, by the power of God the Father, become the first begotten from the dead. He Who was Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, the first and the last, He that liveth and was dead, and yet is alive forevermore, having the keys of hell and of death, He emboldened them to speak thus. (See Revelation 1.8; 17,18.)
First Sermon to Gentiles
"And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree: Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly." (Acts 10.39,40ff) How to the point Peter was when extolling the grand business of God. After all had been said and done, God brought His Son forth from the tomb. This was not a miracle for the world to gaze on. Rather, it was for witnesses chosen before of God. From this, we may gather that the message of the begetting of our Lord from the dead was not intended for the consumption of the ungodly world. But for those who have been blessed to walk by the faith of God's dear Son, this is the very seal upon all the promises of life.
Other accounts of the resurrection proclamation could be given, but we forebear. Sufficient has been shown to render it unmistakably clear- the early church was frequently reminded of the importance of the begetting of their Lord; the Father's only begotten Son.
TEXTS USING THE WORD "BEGOTTEN"
There are a number of Scriptures that use the word, begotten, in them. Some may, at first view, appear to pose some small difficulty in harmonizing with our stated view that the resurrection of Jesus from the dead constituted His begetting and was the fulfillment of Psalm 2. The difficulty is really only the result of casual investigation and will readily dissolve when examined.
John 1.14
"And the Word was made 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." (John 1.14)
Eternity itself would not be long enough to relate a small portion of the beauty in this text. May the Lord be pleased and enable us to glean a little for the moment.
At first reading, one may suppose that the glory beheld by John and the other disciples was during the earthly ministry of the Lord, but that would be only partially correct. On careful reflection, we are reminded that Jesus was God clothed in the humility of a body of flesh. On some few occasions the glory of the Lord did shine, such as the event on the mount we call transfiguration. It is, however, clear that mostly Jesus was shrouded in the burdens of His ministry to His Father. The glory and its appearance was, at best, infrequent.
Notice the order: First, the Word was made flesh; Second, He dwelled among the disciples; and Third, they (we) beheld His glory. That order might also be reckoned as first, next, and last of all. Last of all Jesus was seen in His glory, a glory John identifies as the glory of the only begotten of the Father. Thus, the time when John and the others saw Jesus in His glory was after His begetting or resurrection. To this Peter perfectly agrees: "Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow." (I Peter 1.11) How simple and plain; Jesus first suffered, died and was buried, then the glory followed. We do not rely on the testimony of Peter alone, for this is precisely what Jesus expressed to the disciples on the road to Emmaus the same day (Luke 24.13) of His resurrection: "Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?" (Luke 24.25,26) From the two following verses, it is clear that until Jesus was resurrected from the dead, He did not possess the full glory that was His either before or after His brief sojourn on this earth: "These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:" (John 17.1) "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." (John 17.5)
It should be clear that the language of John 1.14, where it was said they beheld his glory as the only begotten of the Father, can only be applied to the time after the resurrection, for it was then He was glorified.
John 3.16
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3.16) The only question to be resolved regarding this text is, when did God give His only begotten Son? If Jesus was, as some mistakenly suppose, eternally begotten, then God may have given His Son at any time. However, if Jesus was begotten in the resurrection, as seems certain, then God must have given His Son, Jesus, at some time after He came forth from the tomb. Moreover, if Jesus had been given by the Father before He was crucified, then God would have taken Him away for the brief period He hung as a curse for His elect on the tree; when He died alone, and while He reposed in the tomb for three days and three nights. The obvious answer is that God gave Jesus to His family a glorified Saviour and Bishop of their souls after He had been received up to glory to assume all power. It was before His resurrection that Jesus had all the sins of the elect laid upon Him. Certainly, at that time, He had not satisfied all God's good pleasure in Him as the perfect gift for the saints. The sins of the elect must be left behind in the tomb as Christ arose for Him to be given to them.
Hebrews 5.5making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one
"So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee." (Hebrews 5.5ff) What was the function of a high priest? As recorded in verse one, the high priest was taken from among men, ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins. So then, when did Jesus offer gifts and sacrifices? Certainly after His death, for He was Himself the one great sacrifice for sin which was ordained unto death. Thus He could not have offered Himself any time prior to His pleasing the Father in His sacrifice of Himself.
I John 4.9
"In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him." (I John 4.9) When the Lord first appeared in His earthly ministry it was recorded that He came unto His own (John 1.11), but now the Father has sent Him into the world. Both Jew and Gentile are now favored with His blessed propitiation and mediation, for the middle wall of partition has been broken down. "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh." (Ephesians 2. 15-17) Notice: He came and preached peace to you. This, according to the order of the events recorded in this context, was after His resurrection; thus it perfectly harmonizes with the begetting being His coming forth from the dead.
We shall never in this life know all we would like to on such themes, but sufficient has been revealed for us to bow in adoration and praise to Him Who is the first begotten, the only begotten Son of God, who is alive forevermore.
Please direct your comments to
Elder Poole.