In response online to the usual downplaying of monogenes theos (MONOGENHS QEOS, traditionally "only-begotten") as relating to birth and generation, I posted:
In the N.T., monogenes is used in a filial way, one that is used for offspring...see Thayers Greek Lexicon & BAGD. In fact the BAGD states that it could be analogous to prototokos (firstborn). In view of this, John V. Dahms in his The Johannine Use Of Monogenes Reconsidered NTS 29, 1983, p.231 states: We have examined all of the evidence which has come to our attention concerning the meaning of monogenes in the Johannine writings and have found the majority view of modern scholarship has very little to support it. On the other hand, the external evidence, especially that from Philo, Justin and Tertullian, and the internal evidence from the context of its occurrences, makes clear that 'only begotten' is the most accurate translation after all."
I got this reply: it's interesting that you would quote from John V. Dahms who has been opposed in numerous books from theologians and scholars alike. The fact that Dahms has a theological bias against the Trinity is seen in the propagation of the idea that the Son is eternally subordinate to the Father. In other words, there was no choice in submission. The Father is superior, which causes the Son to be inferior. This is hardly the truth with the Trinity. The Son willingly submits to the Father. There's an order to the Godhead and all three are equal. So naturally because of this theological bias of eternal subordination, Dahms would expound on "monogenes" as being properly interpreted as "only begotten." The majority of scholars disagree with his ideas, since this idea of eternal submission was first propagated by the heretic Arius.
My reply: So your opposition to Dahm's is not his thesis, but that the people you like don't like him. Is there something in his thesis that you could isolate for criticism? I also reject your "The majority of scholars disagree with his ideas" since you have never queried all Greek scholars in existence. (And frankly, what do I care about Dahms' religious views when it is his ideas we should be looking at. It is like saying I shouldn't read a book about Obama if the author is critical of him.)
Question: How do you view this as happening? If the verb means "beget", do they think God has a wife? Do they think God has a womb?
Reply: Abraham did beget Isaac. Does Abraham have a womb? (Yes, Abraham had a wife, but the Bible does not say that Sarah Begat Isaac.)
Question: In Hebrews 11:17 Isaac is called Abraham's "only begotten son" too. But certainly Abraham had more than one son. Something more must being going on here.
Reply: In Heb 11:17 it is still a filial relationship. There was a time when Isaac was not, and according to Philo he had "begotten no son in the truest sense but Isaac." The Targum (Pseudo-Jonathan) mentions that Isaac is the son of Abraham's wife while the other is the son of the hand-maid, and "the son of the handmaid shall not be genealogized."
........................
Addendum: There are about 58 proper names in Greek built on the "genes" stem, like Diogenes, which means "born of Zeus" or Hermogenes ("born of Hermes). These are names given by parents to their offspring that represents birth. (See https://www.behindthename.com/names/usage/ancient-greek) There are also words like theogenes which means "born of God." Though there are exceptions, "the word monogenes is used most basically and frequently in contexts having to do with biological offspring." Charles Lee Irons (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary)
In the N.T., monogenes is used in a filial way, one that is used for offspring...see Thayers Greek Lexicon & BAGD. In fact the BAGD states that it could be analogous to prototokos (firstborn). In view of this, John V. Dahms in his The Johannine Use Of Monogenes Reconsidered NTS 29, 1983, p.231 states: We have examined all of the evidence which has come to our attention concerning the meaning of monogenes in the Johannine writings and have found the majority view of modern scholarship has very little to support it. On the other hand, the external evidence, especially that from Philo, Justin and Tertullian, and the internal evidence from the context of its occurrences, makes clear that 'only begotten' is the most accurate translation after all."
I got this reply: it's interesting that you would quote from John V. Dahms who has been opposed in numerous books from theologians and scholars alike. The fact that Dahms has a theological bias against the Trinity is seen in the propagation of the idea that the Son is eternally subordinate to the Father. In other words, there was no choice in submission. The Father is superior, which causes the Son to be inferior. This is hardly the truth with the Trinity. The Son willingly submits to the Father. There's an order to the Godhead and all three are equal. So naturally because of this theological bias of eternal subordination, Dahms would expound on "monogenes" as being properly interpreted as "only begotten." The majority of scholars disagree with his ideas, since this idea of eternal submission was first propagated by the heretic Arius.
My reply: So your opposition to Dahm's is not his thesis, but that the people you like don't like him. Is there something in his thesis that you could isolate for criticism? I also reject your "The majority of scholars disagree with his ideas" since you have never queried all Greek scholars in existence. (And frankly, what do I care about Dahms' religious views when it is his ideas we should be looking at. It is like saying I shouldn't read a book about Obama if the author is critical of him.)
Question: How do you view this as happening? If the verb means "beget", do they think God has a wife? Do they think God has a womb?
Reply: Abraham did beget Isaac. Does Abraham have a womb? (Yes, Abraham had a wife, but the Bible does not say that Sarah Begat Isaac.)
Question: In Hebrews 11:17 Isaac is called Abraham's "only begotten son" too. But certainly Abraham had more than one son. Something more must being going on here.
Reply: In Heb 11:17 it is still a filial relationship. There was a time when Isaac was not, and according to Philo he had "begotten no son in the truest sense but Isaac." The Targum (Pseudo-Jonathan) mentions that Isaac is the son of Abraham's wife while the other is the son of the hand-maid, and "the son of the handmaid shall not be genealogized."
........................
Addendum: There are about 58 proper names in Greek built on the "genes" stem, like Diogenes, which means "born of Zeus" or Hermogenes ("born of Hermes). These are names given by parents to their offspring that represents birth. (See https://www.behindthename.com/names/usage/ancient-greek) There are also words like theogenes which means "born of God." Though there are exceptions, "the word monogenes is used most basically and frequently in contexts having to do with biological offspring." Charles Lee Irons (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary)
It sounds like this guy believes in the Trinity but he gives a good break down of the word only Begotten.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.google.com/amp/s/thelogcollege.wordpress.com/2017/03/23/lets-go-back-to-only-begotten/amp/
Thanks for sharing
Delete