I remember my perplexity when I first knew the doctrine of the Eternal Generation of the Son (that is, it is generated eternally by the Father). I was preparing for the seminary reading Louis Berkhof’s classical systematic theology and found the subject too speculative. the importance of affirming that the Son of God is not a creature, but God Himself, but I could not understand why it was necessary to discuss the nature of the Creation of the Son in such detail Where in the Bible could anyone have this idea?Why is it important?
It turns out that this is very important and not as speculative as it may seem at first.
- Is he the Trinitarian God of Scripture? A God in three people 1.
- The distinctions between people are not at the level of divinity.
- Because the three people are also God.
- According to the brief Catechism of Westminster.
- “There are three people in the Divinity: the Father.
- The Son.
- And the Holy Spirit.
- And these three are one God.
- Of the same substance.
- Equal in power and glory” (BCW 6).
- Christians should not doubt the divinity or personality of a person.
- But the distinctions between the people of the Trinity are called personal property: the Father begets.
- The Son is begat.
- And the Spirit comes from the Father and the Son.
- Understand these distinctions.
- Because denying them is the first step in many heresies.
- The Son is no less divine than God the Father; the Son of God is God Himself.
- No less than the Father.
Therefore, to speak of the eternal generation of the Son is to speak of what is unique to the Son of God: he is begat, which does not minimize the divinity of the son; the birth of the Son does not mean that his divinity is inferior to that of the Father, but it does mean that he receives his personal livelihood from the Father. The divine essence itself is not generated. Instead, in the eternal generation, the Father communicates the divine essence to the Son; The Father and the Son have the same essence, without change.
And this generation must be eternal, could not the generation of the Son at some point occur, for if it were to happen, would not the Son be eternally the Son?nor would the Father be the Father eternally: if the Generation of the Son were an isolated event, it would mean that God, in a sense, is changing. If the Father becomes the Father, or the Son becomes the Son, then God would not be immutable (i. e. , it does not vary). Since the Son of God never changes, should his generation be an eternal generation?it’s not something that happened a long time ago or once and for all. It is a timeless communication, without a defined and immutable place from the Father to the Son. The eternal generation also does not imply a division of God, as if the divine essence were divided between the three people or multiplied from one person to another. Each person has the same divine essence and the fullness of the divine essence. The eternal generation is also a necessary act, which means that it is always and cannot be otherwise.
The eternal generation affirms the full divinity of the Son of God; does not refer in any way to the creation of the Son. If the Son were created, it would not be entirely divine. This was at the heart of the conflict between the father of the Atanase Church and the heretic Arrio in the 4th century. Athanasus correctly argued that the Son of God could not be the first being created, but should be the Son of God forever. There was never a time when the Son did not exist. The Son is always bound to the Father as a Son, and the Father remains Father.
It is true that the eternal generation is a complex subject. Even if we can explain it correctly, we can’t fully understand it. In other words, it’s a mystery.
Where does this teaching of the Scriptures come from? An important testimony is the Gospel of John, where we find the Greek term monogenous. Yes, which King James Version is translated as? Only son? (Jn 1, 14, 18; 3, 16, 18; see 1 John 4, 9). However, most modern translations translate the monogen as? Only son? (ESV, NIV [i], CSB). The jury is still wondering if? Single? It would really be a better translation than “only begotten”, but the concept of eternal generation does not depend on how the monogen is translated. Rather, the concept is largely derived from what the Scriptures reveal about the pre-existence of the Son and the eternal relationship between the Father and the Son (eg, John 17: 5, 24; see Col 1. 15-20; Heb 1. 1-3). . There was never a time when the Father was not the Father of the Son or the Son was not the Son of the Father (John 1: 1-2; see Mt 11: 25-27; Luke 10: 21-22). John 5:26 has often been used to support the doctrine of eternal generation: “For just as the Father has life in himself, he also gave the Son that he might have life in himself. ” Many theologians point out that this is an allowance of life to the Son that could not have happened in time. Therefore, it must be an eternal grant of life. In this case, John 5:26 is a strong support for the eternal generation.
Support for the eternal generation is also found in the Old Testament. A historically important proof text was Psalm 2. 7: “You are my Son, I have begotten you today. ” Although this text is used in the New Testament to refer to the resurrection of Jesus (Acts 13:33), the stated and confirmed affiliation at the resurrection is based on the pre-existing affiliation. Micah 5. 2 has also been used historically to support Eternal Generation 😕 And you, Bethlehem-Ephrata, too small to appear as a group of thousands of Judah, will come from me what will reign in Israel, and whose origins are from ancient times, from the days of eternity? It is generally understood to refer to both the birthplace of Jesus (Bethlehem) and the eternity generated by the Son (? Whose origins are ancient times, days of eternity?). Many modern scholars doubt that this text teaches the eternal generation, but the more recent interpretations are not always better than the traditional ones. Regardless of the point of view of any of these Old Testament texts, the eternal generation of the Son is actually sufficiently based on Scripture. Like many crucial doctrines, it does not come from one or two isolated texts, but from the teaching of the Scriptures as a whole.
As a biblical doctrine, the eternal generation of the Son is not speculative; it is practical, because it speaks of the mediator of creation and redemption. Is the preexisting divine Son the Word? or Logos (Jn 1. 1,14)? by whom the world was made (Cl 1,16; Heb 1,2). It would be incorrect to consider that the work of the Son begins only in the New Testament; He was already active as a Creator and Revelator in the Old Testament (see John 1: 1-5). The Son was also active in redemption in the Old Testament. Judas identifies Jesus as the one who delivered the Israelites from Egypt (Judg 5). In the New Testament, the sonship of Jesus is particularly important when it comes to the work of redemption. In the incarnation, the Son of God assumes a true body and a suitable soul. He was born of a virgin, prepared for the holy pre-existing Son of God. His virgin birth means that he had no implications for Adam’s sin, but he is ahead of a new creation. As the Son of God, Jesus is the fulfillment of David (Lk 1, 31-33) and of Adam (3:38). But it is more than that. He is the Eternal Son of God. He is Emmanuel, God with us (Mt 1,23), the Son of the living God (16,16). Therefore, it is appropriate that his sonship be proclaimed during his baptism (3,17; Mk 1,11; Lk 3,22), tested in the desert (Mt 4,1-11; Mk 1,12-13; Luke 4, 1-13), confirmed at the transfiguration (Mt 17:15); Mk 9. 7; Lk 9,35), ridiculed at the crucifixion (Mt 27,37-44; cf. 26. 63-64), and confirmed in his resurrection (Acts 13,33; Rom 1,3-4). However, the Son does not act in isolation from the Father and the Spirit, since the external works of the Trinity are indivisible.
The Son of God did not come to Palestine in the first century; It existed even before the creation of the world. He created and defended the world, and he definitively achieved the redemption of his people. Is he our God and Savior (2 P. 1. 1)? The Son of God eternally begat.
1 In divinity, is a person, or hypostasis, a subsisting individual of a rational nature?(Thomas Aquinas). Can each Trinitarian be distinguished as an individual, although each one is also left alone?Each is a single divine essence. What distinguishes them is not the difference in divine attributes, but the distinct and incommunicable personal property of each person (the absence of the Father’s Principle, the generation of the Son, the emanation of the Spirit).
[i] NdT: Does the NVI in Portuguese only use generated?