HCSB: "No one has ever seen God. The One and Only Son the One who is at the Father s side He has revealed Him."

Transcription

1 1 Only Begotten Son or God? Text: John 1:18 HCSB: "No one has ever seen God. The One and Only Son the One who is at the Father s side He has revealed Him." Today I am going to continue my response to the Rob and Caleb Show from Torah Resource Radio. I've backed off of it for over a month now, and there are a few things left to cover, one of which I'll get into today. Let me state again here at the beginning of this lesson: I do response sermons like this to help equip people to know how to answer others who say that believing Yeshua is the Messiah, Son of Yahweh, is not enough. I believe it is enough. Enough for salvation. I like how John puts it in 1 John 4:15 - "Whoever confesses that Yeshua is the Son of Yahweh, Yahweh remains in him and he in Yahweh." As you guys know I tried to get on the Rob and Caleb Show to discuss or dialogue on both this subject and the lunar Sabbath, but they refused to accept, and that's their prerogative. I'm just thankful I have the liberty to respond on my own at least, that way when people come and ask me, I can ask them to not just listen to the accusations, but listen to the responses I've made. Ok, let's get into the lesson. THE FOCUS Today we are going to focus on John 1:18 which I read at the beginning from the HCSB. I think most people are familiar with a phrase that exists in the King James Version of John 1:18, that phrase being, "the only begotten Son." The "problem" is that there exists something known as a textual variant at this verse. A textual variant is when you have Greek manuscripts of the NT that differ with one another in reading. Most of these variants are inconsequential, but a few are meaningful and viable. This - a textual variant - is why John 1:18 doesn't read the same in all of the English versions of our Bibles. Let me show you this from 2 other English versions. KJV - No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. NASB - No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained him. So the KJV reads Son. The NASB reads God. Other versions like the ESV and NIV take even more liberty, liberty that I believe is unwarranted, so we will stick with comparing the KJV and NASB, with our base text being what I began with, the HCSB.

2 2 So... which one is correct? Well, before I answer that question, I want to play one clip from the Rob and Caleb show. In this clip John 1:18 comes up in the midst of the discussion on John 1:1 and 14. Rob and Caleb Clip 5.0 So... why do John Cordaro and I cite John 1:18 as "only begotten Son" in our book? Why not "only begotten God"? Well, I don't want to totally speak for John Cordaro here, but I had looked at John 1:18 when we were writing the book, and I didn't find the textual variant to be that big of a deal because of the study I had done in regards to the words elohim and theos. What I mean is that through my studies I could see where either reading "only begotten Son" or "only begotten God" could be valid. To call Yeshua theos does not automatically mean He is the one, supreme Theos or Elohim in the Old Testament. I dealt extensively with this in part 3 of this current series. More on this later. We probably should have addressed the textual variant in the book. I actually did address the variation in a debate chart I made back in early 2005 when I debated a Bible teacher from the Church of Christ on the subject of whether or not Jesus is God Almighty. In that debate chart I acknowledged the reading "only begotten God" and stated that I agree with that reading. However, as time progressed I saw arguments being made by scholars and laymen alike that took both sides of the issue. There are good arguments for "only begotten Son" and there are good arguments for "only begotten God" at John 1:18. SOME OF THE ARGUMENTS For example, one of the arguments presented for the reading "only begotten Son" is the comparative writings of John. John 3:16, John 3:18, and 1 John 4:9 all read "only begotten Son" (monogenes huios). Proponents of this reading point out that it makes more sense for John 1:18 to agree with these other 3 undisputed writings of John. I think that's a good point. I wouldn't say it's conclusive, but it's a good point. Proponents of "only begotten Son" also point out that the majority of the NT manuscripts read "monogenes huios" (only begotten Son) not "monogenes theos." (only begotten God). When I say majority I'm speaking in equivalency of like 1 to 100. In other words it's like you have one oldest manuscript reading "only begotten God" and 100 other manuscripts (that are old but not as old) reading "only begotten Son." These date back as far as around 450 A.D. (and then later), and far outweigh the earlier manuscripts that read "only begotten God." So the "only begotten Son" proponents say they have early attestation too, plus the majority. Another good point.

3 3 Of course the "only begotten God" proponents say that they have the earliest manuscript evidence on their side, and... they are correct. The earliest texts of John's Gospel read "only begotten God" at John 1:18. Yes, they are few, but... they are definitely the oldest. I think that is an excellent point for the "only begotten God" proponents. I'm often a proponent myself of the earliest texts being the better texts. It just seems to make sense to go with the earliest reading possible. So Which is It? How do I believe the text should read? Well, I'm not sure. I can see it going either way. Only begotten Son is certainly not a foreign phrase in John's writings, so that's pretty much a given. I don't think any scholar has a problem with the phrase "only begotten Son" applying to Yeshua. But what about "only begotten God?" Is that legitimate? I believe the answer is yes. That is certainly a strong possibility of how the earliest text of John 1:18 read: monogenes theos. With me conceding that, based upon the earliest manuscripts of the Greek NT, how do I respond to Tim Hegg who thinks that such a reading destroys my position? Well, I respond to it by recognizing that THEOS has a wide semantic range. I refer you to part 3 of this series of lessons in which I discuss the terms elohim and theos, commonly translated as god in our English Bibles. Angels are elohim/theos. The judges of Israel are elohim/theos. Moses is elohim/theos. And Yeshua is most certainly elohim/theos. If we ignore the Biblical evidence of the existence of legitimate elohim, other than Yahweh, then I can see how Tim Hegg thinks John 1:18 is in his favor. But if we examine and receive the Biblical evidence, we should be able to see that Yeshua can be called "the only begotten theos/god" and not be the one God of Israel. Let's Look at John 1:18 More Carefully Let's notice a few important points about John 1:18. First, it comes off the heels of John 1:1 where we've already seen a difference between John 1:1b (the word was with God, ton theon - the God) and John 1:1c (the word was god, theos - a god) in regards to the use of theos. This is why certain English translations say "the word was divine" or "the word was a god" at the end of John 1:1c. I refer you to part 4 of this series for more info on John 1:1. Secondarily, when we get to John 1:18 we find a very bold statement being made that often goes overlooked. I think people focus on the "only begotten Son/God" argument so much that the first part of the verse gets little recognition. John 1:18a NASB - "No one has seen God at any time..."

4 4 Who is that a reference to? Yahweh, correct. John plainly tells us here that no one has seen God at any time. No one has ever seen Yahweh. That seems pretty straightforward doesn't it. The only exception to the "no one" in John 1:18a is found in John 6:46 where we read HCSB - "Not that anyone has seen the Father except the One who is from God. He has seen the Father." Who do you suppose Yeshua is talking about here when he says "except the One who is from God, he has seen the Father"? I think he's talking about himself. So the "no man" in John 1:18 excludes Yeshua based on John 6:46. Much like when we read in Romans 3:23 that "all men have sinned" it is to the exclusion of the one man who never sinned based upon additional texts in Romans as well as elsewhere in Scripture. So minus Yeshua, the closest that any man got to seeing the Father, or as John 1:18 says, seeing God (Theos), is Moses in Exodus 33: Let's read it. Yahweh tells Moses here that no man can see his face and live, so he places him in a rock crevice and shows Moses his back, but not his face. This is the closest any man, minus Yeshua, has come to seeing God. Remember, John 1:18 says "no one has seen God at any time." Now, I ask a simple question. Has anyone ever seen Yeshua, the Son of God? Yes, many men saw him, and not just his back, but they saw his face. That one, simple point proves that Yeshua cannot be the God of John 1:18a because "no one has seen God at any time." Now, if John 1:18b goes on to say "the only begotten God, who is in the bosom (or at the side) of the Father, he has explained him" it would mean that Yeshua is another god, another mighty one. Remember, not another mighty one in the sense of another supreme mighty one, or in the sense of a second Yahweh. No, not like that. But a legitimate elohim or mighty one next to God Almighty. We might say "the only begotten mighty one." And that brings me to another point, that's the phrase "only begotten" here in John 1:18 to describe Yeshua. Is Yahweh ever described in Scripture as being begotten? Well, no, because Yahweh is not begotten. I just taught a lesson last Sabbath where the Greek term mono-genes described the only Son of the widow woman in Luke 7: There are other texts in the NT where the term mono-genes is used to describe only children.

5 5 Is it appropriate then to apply the term mono-genes to Yahweh? To God Almighty? I don't think so. I don't believe you can make that argument from Scripture. Yahweh isn't a child. Yahweh is produced. He is the producer. The ULTIMATE producer. So here's what we have: 1. No man hath seen God at any time 2. Many men saw Yeshua 3. Yeshua is called God in John 1:18b 4. Yeshua can't be the God of John 1:18a 5. The God of John 1:18a is not mono-genes 6. The God of John 1:18b is mono-genes What John 1:18 is teaching in totality is this. No one has ever seen the God, the Supreme being. But, the only begotten god, Yeshua (Yahweh's Son), he has explained Yahweh for us. That word explained at the end of verse comes from the Greek word exegesis. Yeshua exegetes Yahweh for us. He shows us who Yahweh is. When we look at Yeshua we are in a strong sense "seeing Yahweh." Not in the sense that he is Yahweh, because Yahweh can't be seen. Rather, it's in the sense that Yahweh conceived Yeshua directly by his spirit, placed the fullness of his spirit inside of Yeshua, and commissioned him to do his work upon the earth. When you look at Yeshua, you see Yahweh. Why? Because he always does what pleases Yahweh. When you listen to Yeshua, you hear Yahweh speak. Why? Because he never says anything contrary to what Yahweh would say. John 5:30, John 8:28 So, does John 1:18 call Yeshua "the only begotten God?" Maybe. It's quite probable based upon the earliest Greek NT texts available. Does this mean Yeshua is God Almighty? Not at all brothers and sisters. Anyone who says John 1:18 proves Yeshua is Yahweh just has not examined all of the Biblical evidence concerning the words elohim or theos, and has not considered all of what John 1:18 says. And when people are not willing to examine the evidence, or have open dialogue, and they just brush you off, you end up with statements like this: Play clip 5.1 Do I believe Yeshua is just a man? No, that's dishonest, and bearing false witness.

6 6 Do I believe Yeshua is a man. Of course. Scripture calls him a man in numerous places. Do I believe Yeshua is yod, hey, waw, hey? No, I don't. But with Caleb and Rob, it's like that's the only options. You either believe Yeshua is Yahweh or that he's JUST a man. If someone ever asks me that question, I don't answer them. I explain to them that there question is invalid because it leaves out the proper answer: believing that Yeshua is the Messiah, the Son of Yahweh. The answer that the Father revealed to Peter in Matthew 16: My hope is that people will not just listen to Rob, Caleb and Tim. My hope is that people will not just listen to me. My hope is that people will open up their Bible and spend some time studying rather than just jumping on a bandwagon or thinking they can read a paper in 10 minutes and come to a conclusion. Listen brothers and sisters. A way that you can honor Yahweh is this. Spend time diligently studying His Word. Don't study it to prove what you already believe. Study it to find out the truth. Let's stand and close in prayer.