Eternally Begotten and Psalms 2:7

food4thought

Loving truth
Site Supporter
Jul 9, 2002
2,929
725
50
Watervliet, MI
✟383,729.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I would have to look at a specific instance, but I'm not sure they are using that Psalm for anything more than stating Jesus' position as Messiah.

Acts 13:33 seems to indicate Christ's being begotten as happening at His resurrection, or maybe at His coronation in heaven shortly after.

Hebrews 1 may be the best bet for a different use of the Psalm, but even here it's only being used to argue about Jesus' superiority to angels (as well as all who inherit salvation 1:14) and isn't making an ontological statement about the 2nd person of the Trinity.

It still leaves open the question of what it means when it says "today I have begotten you"...
 
Upvote 0

Rubiks

proud libtard
Aug 14, 2012
4,293
2,259
United States
✟137,866.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
"Eternal generation" as I understand it just seems like glorified Semi-Arianism to me. I do not see a meaningful difference between "beget" and "created." (I've even seen some recycle Jehovah's Witness arguments to support the doctrine.) If the second person of the trinity is a derived being, then he simply doesn't share all the attributes of God The Father (such as being uncaused)

Also, it's never explained why the generation of the son is a necessary act of God. It's just asserted to be the case.
 
Upvote 0

food4thought

Loving truth
Site Supporter
Jul 9, 2002
2,929
725
50
Watervliet, MI
✟383,729.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
"Eternal generation" as I understand it just seems like glorified Semi-Arianism to me. I do not see a meaningful difference between "beget" and "created." (I've even seen some recycle Jehovah's Witness arguments to support the doctrine.) If the second person of the trinity is a derived being, then he simply doesn't share all the attributes of God The Father (such as being uncaused)

At this point I am inclined to agree, but I hold out hope that someone here can explain it sufficiently for me to be able to accept the Nicene Creed as it was intended.

Also, it's never explained why the generation of the son is a necessary act of God. It's just asserted to be the case.

Right, but I might be able to accept that if the statement can be reconciled with the NT usage of Psalm 2.
 
Upvote 0

WherevertheWindblows

Well-Known Member
Dec 30, 2018
503
163
City
✟7,668.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
At this point I am inclined to agree, but I hold out hope that someone here can explain it sufficiently for me to be able to accept the Nicene Creed as it was intended.



Right, but I might be able to accept that if the statement can be reconciled with the NT usage of Psalm 2.

Unless what is meant by the creed when its specific in stating, "begotten NOT made" is referring to Jesus Christ being begotten from the dead, being the firstborn of the dead, born in eternity (as it speaks) perhaps as it relates more specifically to the resurrection, he is the first begotten of the dead Rev 1:5 .so Christ being begotten can pertain to being so from the dead.

The Word was MADE flesh, the Son was MADE of a woman made under the law, so if the Nicene Creed states "Begotten and NOT made" would that be an indicator of what point the creed is speaking of there? Such as Christ being begotten from the dead (at the time of his resurrection) and be in agreement with the scriptures in that way?
 
Upvote 0

food4thought

Loving truth
Site Supporter
Jul 9, 2002
2,929
725
50
Watervliet, MI
✟383,729.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Unless what is meant by the creed when its specific in stating, "begotten NOT made" is referring to Jesus Christ being begotten from the dead, being the firstborn of the dead, born in eternity (as it speaks) perhaps as it relates more specifically to the resurrection, he is the first begotten of the dead Rev 1:5 .so Christ being begotten can pertain to being so from the dead.

That's an interesting idea that hadn't really crossed my mind in that way. So "eternally begotten" has nothing to do with His eternal Divine nature, but has to do to His resurrection? I'll have to chew on that a bit... it does make the Christian Forums statement of faith version ("begotten before all ages") a bit awkward.

The Word was MADE flesh, the Son was MADE of a woman made under the law,

I always took this to be speaking of His human nature.

so if the Nicene Creed states "Begotten and NOT made" would that be an indicator of what point the creed is speaking of there? Such as Christ being begotten from the dead (at the time of his resurrection) and be in agreement with the scriptures in that way?

I had not thought of it in this way, thank you... but I'm pretty sure that was not the original intent of the Nicene Creed (Origin had a strong influence on the council, if I remember correctly). I'll have to think on this idea a bit.

God bless
 
Upvote 0

WherevertheWindblows

Well-Known Member
Dec 30, 2018
503
163
City
✟7,668.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That's an interesting idea that hadn't really crossed my mind in that way. So "eternally begotten" has nothing to do with His eternal Divine nature, but has to do to His resurrection? I'll have to chew on that a bit... it does make the Christian Forums statement of faith version ("begotten before all ages") a bit awkward.

Not necessarily, unless I am misunderstanding it, maybe I am. If he were begotten before the world ever was, or before the ages (however one might address that) then that would definitely negate that at such a time has anything to do with his being made of a woman (in this world) being before the ages, and it would also negate the day he was begotten from the dead (since he is the first begotten of the dead).



I always took this to be speaking of His human nature.

Me too :) I don't believe "begotten before all ages" would be speaking of his being made flesh /participating in our humanity (made of the seed of David) type thing



I had not thought of it in this way, thank you... but I'm pretty sure that was not the original intent of the Nicene Creed (Origin had a strong influence on the council, if I remember correctly). I'll have to think on this idea a bit.

God bless

On one level I was attempting to present a way to grant the creed the benefit of the doubt (according to its own wording) "begotten NOT made" when the scriptures uses both those words in relation to Christ's birth, whether made of a woman (as it pertains to his humanity) or being the first begotten of the dead (after the Word was made flesh) but before our world or any of the ages the creed might be implying (while using "this day I have begotten thee") I don't know how that come to be. However, I do share the same doubts in respects to the original intent of the creed that you expressed in the above.

And God richly bless you too food4thought

I edited after "but before" to better clarify
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: food4thought
Upvote 0

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,944
11,098
okie
✟214,996.00
Faith
Anabaptist
"born of woman" is certainly more accurate , better translation, than "made of a woman" (a poor translation at best) .

"begotten" is unique, not understood most of the time, if ever.

The Word was MADE flesh, the Son was MADE of a woman

I always took this to be speaking of His human nature.

his being made of a woman

whether made of a woman (as it pertains to his humanity)
 
Upvote 0

WherevertheWindblows

Well-Known Member
Dec 30, 2018
503
163
City
✟7,668.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
"born of woman" is certainly more accurate , better translation, than "made of a woman" (a poor translation at best) .

"begotten" is unique, not understood most of the time, if ever.

The Word "being made flesh" would indicate the same thing when it comes to his "being made of" a woman (who was flesh) and in this thing took upon himself the seed of David. Begotten doesnt have to indicate his birth into this world but rather after the fact, his being begotten from the dead, which is the day spoken of when he was made a priest forever given his springing out from Judah (and being on earth) Moses said nothing concerning the priesthood. He has an unchangeable priesthood and this having to do with his resurrection. Its easier to reconcile the scripture with scripture then it is how others put things without using the scriptures because you are always guessing at what they mean.
 
Upvote 0

WherevertheWindblows

Well-Known Member
Dec 30, 2018
503
163
City
✟7,668.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No. Not even close to the same thing.

So when was Jesus Christ made flesh if he wasn't made of a woman made under the law?

Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

WherevertheWindblows

Well-Known Member
Dec 30, 2018
503
163
City
✟7,668.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Angels do not die

Hebrews 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

Jesus made flesh is his being made lower than the angels for the suffering of death

Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

His being begotten in the psalms indicate his resurrection when he was made High priest forever
 
Upvote 0

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,944
11,098
okie
✟214,996.00
Faith
Anabaptist
So when was Jesus Christ made flesh if he wasn't made of a woman made under the law?

Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
See biblegateway dot com for BETTER TRANSLATIONS.
 
Upvote 0

WherevertheWindblows

Well-Known Member
Dec 30, 2018
503
163
City
✟7,668.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Who teaches this ?

God raising up a Savior mentioned here

Acts 13:23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus:

God doing so according as it is written here

Duet 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. (See John 12:49 Christ speaking by commandment/ John 5:46 Moses writing of him/ confirmation in Acts 7:37, & Heb 3:5)

But then God raising him up ((((again))) is also mentioned in Acts (which pertains to that which is written in the second psalm as is mentioned in the verse itself)

Acts 13:33 God has fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that
he has raised up Jesus again
; as it is also written in the second Psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. (See Hebrews 5:5-6 mentioning the same thing but adds, "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.

The Son of man / the vision of all/ and openly declared the Son of God Matt 9:9 & Mark 17:9

Romans 1:4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

He is the first begotten of the dead. His priesthood is forever, he lives forever, if he were on earth he wouldn't be a priest, his is unchangeable because now he lives forever having tasted death, thats why he was made flesh to taste death for all men by the grace of God, his being raised was twofold as unto Isreal as a Savior and fulfilling the second Psalm raising Jesus up again (from the dead).

His blood, his death, his being begotten from the dead

Rev 1:5 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

The gospel pertains to the resurrection from the dead
 
Upvote 0

food4thought

Loving truth
Site Supporter
Jul 9, 2002
2,929
725
50
Watervliet, MI
✟383,729.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
But then God raising him up ((((again))) is also mentioned in Acts (which pertains to that which is written in the second psalm as is mentioned in the verse itself)

Acts 13:33 God has fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that
he has raised up Jesus again
; as it is also written in the second Psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. (See Hebrews 5:5-6 mentioning the same thing but adds, "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.

"Again" is not in the Greek, it was added by the KJV translators, and none of the modern translations render it that way.

Here is the KJV with Strong's numbers:

Acts 13:33 KJV+ (G3754) GodG2316 hath fulfilledG1603 the sameG5026 unto usG2254 theirG846 children,G5043 in that he hath raised up Jesus again;G450 G2424 asG5613 it is alsoG2532 writtenG1125 inG1722 theG3588 secondG1208 psalm,G5568 ThouG4771 artG1488 myG3450 Son,G5207 this dayG4594 have IG1473 begottenG1080 thee.G4571

Here is how the NKJV renders it:

Acts 13:33 NKJV God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm: 'YOU ARE MY SON, TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU.'


I like a lot of what you're saying, but felt this needed to be brought to your attention.

God bless;
Michael
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

WherevertheWindblows

Well-Known Member
Dec 30, 2018
503
163
City
✟7,668.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
"Again" is not in the Greek, it was added by the KJV translators, and none of the modern translations render it that way.

Here is the KJV with Strong's numbers:

Acts 13:33 KJV+ (G3754) GodG2316 hath fulfilledG1603 the sameG5026 unto usG2254 theirG846 children,G5043 in that he hath raised up Jesus again;G450 G2424 asG5613 it is alsoG2532 writtenG1125 inG1722 theG3588 secondG1208 psalm,G5568 ThouG4771 artG1488 myG3450 Son,G5207 this dayG4594 have IG1473 begottenG1080 thee.G4571

Here is how the NKJV renders it:

Acts 13:33 NKJV God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm: 'YOU ARE MY SON, TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU.'


I like a lot of what you're saying, but felt this needed to be brought to your attention.

God bless;
Michael

God raised him up to speak what was commanded him, surely being raised up to speak to them is not the same as being raised from the dead. Again is shown elsewhere but the question would be are these not in the Greek either?

Mat 16:21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again G1453 the third day.

Mat 17:23 And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again G1453 . And they were exceeding sorry.

Acts 13:37 But he, whom God raised again G1453, saw no corruption.

Romans 4:25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again G1453 for our justification.

Numbers for those (above) are different from how Acts 13:33 is separated from the name of Jesus

Acts 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again G450; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

Are you saying that G450 is non existent or that it doesn't apply where Christ is raised from the dead?

Rise again G450 is not the words used here either?

Rise%20again.png



It shows it is used for rise, rise up, rise again (most shown as applying to Christ)

rise%20again%20two.png
 
Upvote 0

food4thought

Loving truth
Site Supporter
Jul 9, 2002
2,929
725
50
Watervliet, MI
✟383,729.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The definition doesn't mention "again", but it is there in the translation for some reason.

I'm probably just splitting hairs for no reason... do you interpret the word "again" to have some special significance? I think the translation "rise" is perfectly acceptable.
 
Upvote 0

WherevertheWindblows

Well-Known Member
Dec 30, 2018
503
163
City
✟7,668.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The definition doesn't mention "again", but it is there in the translation for some reason.

I'm probably just splitting hairs for no reason... do you interpret the word "again" to have some special significance? I think the translation "rise" is perfectly acceptable.

God raising up Christ first was shown by Moses, when God speaks of "raising up" a Prophet to put his words in his mouth. Obviously this isn't speaking of God raising Jesus up from the dead as God was to fulfill the second psalm as it pertains to raising up Christ from the dead where it speaks of the day he is begotten his being the firstborn from the dead or as Christ being begotten from the dead. So the Psalm is God fulfilling the same, in raising Christ up again but according to how it speaks there even as it does elsewhere of Christ rising again from the dead. It was really just contrasting God raising up a Prophet and the words given Christ and raising up Jesus from the dead, in another conversation I was sharing with someone else that stuck since we were discussing Christ being raised up and in which ways he was, I was just putting emphasis between them there and carried that over here.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: food4thought
Upvote 0

WherevertheWindblows

Well-Known Member
Dec 30, 2018
503
163
City
✟7,668.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Okay, I am trying this again

God raising up a Savior is mentioned here

Acts 13:23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus

Just as it shows God will raise them up a Prophet is shown here also

Deut 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

John 12:49 confirms Jesus Christ speaking by commandment just as in John 5:46 Moses writings of him are confirmed as speaking of Christ Acts 7:37, & Hebrews 3:5

All of which was not speaking of raising Christ up from the dead is what I was pointing out.

However, in Acts 13:33 it speaks of God raising Jesus up again but not in the context of what is shown in Moses (in the above) but in the context of the resurrection.

Acts 13:33 God has fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that
he has raised up Jesus again
; as it is also written in the second Psalm, (Psalm 2:7) Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

See Hebrews 5:5-6 which mentions the same thing but adds to it, "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 linking in the two as it relates to the Son raised from the dead as well as being made a priest for ever which is not after the order of Aaron (of the earthly priesthood) which is why if he were on earth he should not be a priest.

Romans 1:4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

He is the first begotten of the dead Revelation 1:5. I am "he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore" made a priest for ever. But again, If he were on earth he would not be a priest. He was made a priest by the oath of God (not after the order of Aaron) but after the order of Melchizedek. Our Lord springing out of Judah wouldn't mean much when it come to what Moses said concerning that tribe and the priesthood. And as we know as the children are partakers of flesh and blood he himself likewise took part of the same. He was made a little lower than the angels for the purpose of suffering of death (whom God raised up again) and crowned with glory and honor. Earlier I was just pointing out being raised up is shown twofold, one as unto Israel as a Savior who would speak what was commanded him (as Moses shows it) Moses being a faithful servant for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after as Hebrews 3:5 shows it, and John 5:46 also. Acts 13:33 shows that God had to fulfill the second Psalm (which he did) in the raising Jesus up (again) from the dead. The gospel basically...

Another poster was irked by the word "made" but my translation shows a few "made's" as it pertains to Christ, but they don't bother me

I have, God sent his Son, made of a woman made under the law... just as Galatians 4:4 says the Word was made flesh or John 1:14 Christ was made of the seed of David since he "took upon himself" such. Romans 1:3 he took upon himself the seed of Abraham ... he was made in the likeness of men Philippians 2:7 Not taking upon himself the nature of Angels (which die not) Luke 20:36 but rather, he was made lower than the Angels (flesh and blood) for the very suffering of death. Again, the gospel, which speaks of his death, and resurrection, by which he is declared the Son of God with power, Jesus Christ the first begotten from the dead (this day). God made him both Lord and Christ Acts 2:36 and a high priest for ever by the oath and calling of God.

Rev 1:5 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

Psalm 110:1 Points to the resurrection also just as in Acts 2:34 quotes the same Psalm stating in verse 31 that David (there) seeing this before was speaking of the resurrection of Christ. And this Jesus hath God raised up which is also in accord with Acts 13:33 which speaks of God raising Jesus again in respects to the fulfillment of the second Psalm also. Hebrews 5:5-6 seems to tie in being made a high priest (not after the order of Aaron) and the day he is begotten again (from the dead) as speaking of the same time. "Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee" Revelation 1:5 ... Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead... Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

Heb 5:5 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.

Directly related to that context, next verse

Heb 5:6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

So again, If he were on earth he should not be a priest (especially after the order he was called) given our Lord sprang from Judah Heb 7:14 of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning the priesthood. Hebrews ties in Jesus made a high priest (after the order of Melchisedec) with God declaring the day he had begotten him (which I believe is speaking of his being begotten from the dead there) even as he is declared the Son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead being the first begotten of the dead.

I am sort of a mess when it comes to presenting stuff but thats the jist of how I am catching it.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: food4thought
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Jonaitis

Soli Deo Gloria
Jan 4, 2019
5,225
4,212
Wyoming
✟123,651.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
I have been wrestling with the doctrine of the Son being eternally begotten according to the Nicene Creed. Aside from being difficult philosophically, there are Bible passages that say Christ was begotten at a specific time (Psalms 2:7; Acts 13:33; Hebrews 1:5; Hebrews 5:5).

So I'm asking for help in understanding it philosophically, as well as exegesis of the passages listed above. Thanks in advance;

Michael

-------------------EDIT----------------------

I wholeheartedly agree with the eternal Deity of Christ, the Word of God, and that Jesus Christ is the Word of God. My question revolves around the idea of His being "begotten of the Father before all ages", which is the Nicene Creed. How does this line up with Psalms 2:7 and it's usage in the NT? Sorry for not being more clear originally.


The Son was begotten before time, not in time.

I was actually discussing this issue with my high school friend, who is Muslim, and she was debating with me how being the Son of God is the same thing as being God. I first quoted C.S. Lewis on what it means to be begotten in the following:

"We don’t use the words begetting or begotten much in modern English, but everyone still knows what they mean. To beget is to become the father of: to create is to make. And the difference is this. When you beget, you beget something o the same kind as yourself. A man begets human babies, a beaver begets little beavers and a bird begets eggs which turn into little birds. But when you make, you make something of a different kind from yourself. A bird makes a nest, a beaver builds a dam, a man makes a wireless set – or he may make something more like himself than a wireless set: say, a statue. If he is clever enough carver he may make a statue which is very like man indeed. But, of course, it is not a real man; it only looks like one. It cannot breathe or think. It is not alive. Now that is the first thing to get clear. What God begets is God; just as what man begets is man. What God creates is not God; just as what man makes is not man. That is why men are not Sons of God in the sense that Christ is. They may be like God in certain ways, but they are not things of the same kind. They are more like statues or pictures of God.” (Mere Christianity)

Very good explanation in my opinion, I couldn’t find one better. So, to beget is to bring forth another of the same kind. So, unless you're Adam or Eve, you were begotten by a man and conceived by a woman, thus you are a human after the likeness of your father. This is important to understand, because "Son" doesn’t mean that God created another deity, nor does it mean that his Son is a lesser deity.

Now, if God is self-existent, eternal, unchanging, all-powerful, all-knowing, ever-present, and infinite, then we must agree that it is utterly impossible for him to create another such being, otherwise it wouldn’t be self-existent, eternal, unchanging since it went from non-being to being. Nor would it be all-powerful if it came out of another, neither all-knowing if at one time it didn’t know anything, etc, etc. We find a passage in Isaiah that speaks of such a thing:

"Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me" (Isaiah 43:10)

This is a most true statement. There can only be one God who is in essence eternal and perfect in all his attributes. If God were to create, as mentioned in the quote above, it would be made into something entirely different than himself. It would be a part of his creation, rather than something of his essence. You aren’t a part of God, you are a creature of made by God, created as another kind of being than himself.

However, when we encounter words from the Lord Jesus who says he is the only begotten Son of God, and that he was before Abraham, and that he shared in the glory with his Father before the world existed, then we are to understand that he isn’t something created. Remember, a creature is not the same kind as the Creator, but if God has begotten another it would be conclusively the same kind as himself. What does this actually mean then? If God is eternal of his kind, then the Son is in essence eternal in his kind. If God is perfect, then so must his begotten be perfect. If God is one God, then his Son must be of that one. As stated before, God cannot produce another God. It must then be that the Son is Very God as his Father is Very God. Yet, because there is a relationship between the two, it must mean then that they are two subsist of the same divine nature.

If you follow the line of thinking behind Jesus’ words, he is essentially saying, “I am God of God, the same in essence and power and being as my Father, eternal and not made.” You cannot interpret his words in any other way. A son shares the same kind of nature as his Father, and if his Father is the One God, he must necessarily be the One God. Here are some passages that draws this out:

"Philip said to him, ‘Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen Me has seen the Father. How can you say, Show us the Father? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in Me does his works. Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me, or else believe on account of the works themselves’ (John 14:8-11).

~ and ~

So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, ‘How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.’ Jesus answered them, ‘I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.’ The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, ‘I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?’ The Jews answered him, ‘It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God’ (John 10:24-33).

Eternal Generation has no beginning, because the relationship had no beginning.

Jesus was made, but not begotten according to his humanity; begotten, but not made according to his divinity.

I hope this helps.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: food4thought
Upvote 0