Why do you interpret the word begotten to mean born when it actually means ‘unique’? Aren’t you twisting the word to suit your own meaning that way?

Answer

This objection is very easy to answer if we only allow the Bible to speak for itself. The Greek word ‘monogenes’ (number 3439 in Strong’s Concordance) is translated in the KJV Bible as “only begotten”. The meaning of this word is said to be “unique” and not “only begotten”. The most famous Bible passage where this occurs is 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

A casual examination of the Biblical usage of this word will reveal what it means.

This word was used nine times in the New Testament. We will list all the verse and examine them to see what the word means. Three of the nine verses can not mean anything else but born:

Luke 7:12 “Now when he came nigh to the gate of the city, behold, there was a dead man carried out, the only son of his mother, and she was a widow: and much people of the city was with her.”

Luke 8:42 For he had one only daughter, about twelve years of age, and she lay a dying. But as he went the people thronged him.

Luke 9:38 And, behold, a man of the company cried out, saying, Master, I beseech thee, look upon my son: for he is mine only child .

In the above verses the word “monogenes “clearly means born, it doesn not mean ‘unique’.

This is confirmed by the actual meaning of the word itself:

According to Strong’s concordance, ‘monogenes’ is compounded of two separate words, namely ‘monos’ and ‘ginomai’. It says

“3439 … Monogenes … from 3441 and 1096; Only-born, i.e. sole - only (begotten, child) (James Strong, LL.D., S.T.D., The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, New Strong’s Concise Dictionary of the words in the Greek Testament, page 59)

This next verse is the one that the theologians always pick to mean ‘unique’:

Hebrews 11:17 “By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,”

We have seen from the other clear verses that the word clearly means born, nowhere has it been translated as ‘unique’. The reason they understand the above text to mean unique is because of the fact that Abraham had more than one child, so they conclude that Isaac cannot be his only born. But what is being ignored is the fact that Abraham had only one child from his wife Sarah. Isaac was the “only begotten” child of promise. He was the only Son born to Abraham by a special divine promise; his only Son from His wife Sarah.

So far, all the above instances where the word ‘begotten’ (monogenes) has been used clearly refer to birth. Why then, when it comes to Jesus, must the word have another meaning? Such would not be consistent Bible study.

Here are the five verses using that word to refer to Jesus Christ:

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 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

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.

Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

1John 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.

When we allow the Bible to be its own interpreter it becomes very easy to understand. Christ is the

”only begotten” Son of God. This, no doubt, makes Him unique. There is no other being in the whole universe who was “begotten” of God as Christ was. This is the point that John is trying to emphasize when he refers to Christ by the word “monogenes”. (Further suggested reading: “The Begotten Series”)

Furthermore, with the correct understanding of the word we can harmonize the New Testament with what the Old Testament says in Proverbs 8:22-25. Notice how inspiration uses this passage to show why Christ is so unique.

"The Sovereign of the universe was not alone in His work of beneficence. He had an associate--a co-worker who could appreciate His purposes, and could share His joy in giving happiness to created beings. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God." John 1:1, 2. Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father - one in nature, in character, in purpose - the only being that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God. "His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." Isaiah 9:6. His "goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." Micah 5:2. And the Son of God declares concerning Himself: "The Lord possessed Me in the beginning of His way, before His works of old. I was set up from everlasting. . . . When He appointed the foundations of the earth: then I was by Him, as one brought up with Him: and I was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him." Proverbs 8:22-30. {PP 34.1}

It is this that makes Christ everything that He is. Elsewhere we are told how Christ is the Son of God:

"A complete offering has been made; for "God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son,"-- not a son by creation, as were the angels, nor a son by adoption, as is the forgiven sinner, but a Son begotten in the express image of the Father's person, and in all the brightness of his majesty and glory, one equal with God in authority, dignity, and divine perfection. In him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. {ST, May 30, 1895 par. 3}

Thus inspiration confirms the words of Scripture that Christ is indeed the “only begotten” of the Father. He was begotten of Him. Notice the words used by the prophet in reference to how the Son of God was begotten “Son begotten in the express image of the Father's person, and in all the brightness of his majesty and glory, one equal with God in authority, dignity, and divine perfection”

It is very important to note the words “in all the brightness of his majesty and glory”. Understanding the meaning entailed with these words gives us a better insight on what event sister White was describing.

Question: When Jesus was begotten of Mary, was He begotten in all the brightness of the Father’s majesty and glory?

Here are few statements to answer this question:

“Wonder, O heavens, and be astonished, O earth. The heavenly Teacher had come. Who was He?--No less a being than the Son of God Himself. He appeared as God, and at the same time as the Elder Brother of the human race. "The word was made flesh, and dwelt among us." Christ must come as a human being. Had He come in the glory that He had with the Father, men could not have lived in His presence.”  {ST, May 17, 1905 par. 12}  

“Christ came, but not in the brightness of his divine glory. He laid aside his royal robe and kingly crown, clothed his divinity with humanity, and came to live upon the earth as a man among men. Had he come in the full power and glory of his divinity, sinners could not have stood in his presence without being destroyed.”  {RH, September 13, 1906 par. 5}  

“Christ came as a man, that He might meet men where they are. Had He come in all His glory, human beings could not have endured the sight.” {RH, September 24, 1901 par. 11}  

“He left His glory, His majesty, His kingly throne and robes of royalty, and became poor, that through His poverty the children of men might be made rich.” {3T 198.1}  

Obviously the answer to the above question is No; Christ was not begotten of Mary in all the brightness of the Father’s majesty and glory.

What about the resurrection, was Jesus resurrected in all the brightness of the Father’s majesty and glory?

Again the answer has to be no because “Had He come in all His glory, human beings could not have endured the sight.”

In other words, when sister white says “a Son begotten in the express image of the Father's person, and in all the brightness of his majesty and glory, one equal with God in authority, dignity, and divine perfection.” She was not referring to the time when Jesus was begotten of Mary or begotten from the dead. She was referring to an event that would have taken place at a time when Jesus could be begotten in all the brightness of the Father’s majesty and glory. That event could have only taken place in heaven, before anything was created.

With this understanding, that Christ was truly the first-born of heaven, the only begotten of the Father, we can begin to understand the experience that Enoch had:

"Of Enoch it is written that he lived sixty-five years, and begat a son. ….after the birth of his first son Enoch reached a higher experience; he was drawn into a closer relationship with God. He realized more fully his own obligations and responsibility as a son of God. And as he saw the child's love for its father, its simple trust in his protection; as he felt the deep, yearning tenderness of his own heart for that first-born son, he learned a precious lesson of the wonderful love of God to men in the gift of His Son and the confidence which the children of God may repose in their heavenly Father. The infinite, unfathomable love of God through Christ became the subject of his meditations day and night, and with all the fervor of his soul he sought to reveal that love to the people among whom he dwelt. {ML 255.3}

If we can only comprehend that love! How could God love us so much, enough to give us His own Son to die for us, enough to turn His face from His dying Son on the cross and even to hide His face from Him because He became sin for us, just so we can have eternal life. If this understanding could only break the darkness in our minds and the traditions that we have so long cherished, we too can have the experience of Enoch, and we may belong to the 144,000 that will be translated as Enoch was.