I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
The Nicene Creed declares that the Son, Jesus Christ, is “begotten, not made.” Now this distinction seems rather abstract. It may even seem irrelevant to the Christian life. Is the begottenness of the Son simply an issue for eggheaded philosophers perched in their ivory towers? Or does it bear practical significance?
The Creed’s statement is not only abstract, it is also hotly debated. The church historian John Faulkner writes that the Son’s begottenness was “not fully determined by any common action of the church until the Council of Nicaea, in 325.” So for nearly 300 years, the church lived and grew before this doctrine was ever settled. Faulkner continues, “At the council of Nicea there were two views in mortal conflict — the Athanasian and the Arian.”1 Arius taught that God the Father begot the Son by creating him, but Athanasius held that the term “begotten” actually means that Christ was not created. The Athanasian view made it into the Nicene Creed, while Arians were condemned as heretics. Still, Arian teachings have endured to this day. For instance, Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that the Son was created.
Is it really that important to spend time on an issue that is both abstract and contentious? Can’t we just agree to disagree, and move on to more important things?
While such a reaction may be tempting, I contend that the doctrine of the Son’s begottenness is vitally important. It strikes at the heart of how we view God and the Gospel because it demonstrates that Christ is unique from all of creation, is one in Being with God the Father, and is the one who reveals the Father to us. To say it in opposite terms, if we deny that the Son is “begotten, not made,” then Jesus is simply another part of creation, not equal with the Father, and we cannot truly say that he reveals the Father to us. And without this revelation, God remains unknowable and impersonal. He is an altogether different God.
Before I get into the meat of those arguments, I will lay out some important biblical data, as well as the Arian interpretation of that data. Various parts of the Bible speak of the Son’s begottenness.
- A royal and anointed Son. Psalm 2:7: “The Lord said to me, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you.” This verse is quoted several times in the New Testament. Psalm 2 does not specify the Son’s exact identity, but it does contain several clues. He is the Lord’s anointed (2:2), the King of Zion (2:6), a source of fear for the ungodly and of refuge for the righteous (2:12). Who exactly is this Messiah-Son-King?
- A resurrected Son. In Act 13:33, Paul declares that Jesus’ resurrection fulfilled this Psalm: “This he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus, as also it is written in the second Psalm, “‘You are my Son, today I have begotten you.” So, did Jesus “become” God’s Son when he rose from the dead?
- A priestly Son. Hebrews 5:5 connects Jesus’ Sonship to his priesthood: “So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you.” This great high priest is also above the angels, as Hebrews 1:5 says, “For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son today I have begotten you”?
- An only Son. John 1:14: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.” The Word is the Father’s only Son, who came from the Father into human flesh. Additionally, John 3:16: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” In both of these verses, the Greek word translated as “only Son” is monogenēs, – mono meaning only, and genēs meaning begotten. Hence a literal translation would be only-begotten.
- A firstborn Son. Colossians 1:15, “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all
creation.” While this verse does not contain the word “begotten,” it is key to this topic because the word “firstborn” seems to imply the Son was created.
All these verses speak of the Son’s begottenness, and they all raise a crucial question: Did God beget the Son at a point in time, such as the beginning of creation, or he came into the world (the incarnation), or when he rose from the dead? Was the Son of God made?
Briefly, we should explore the Arian answer to this question. According to Arius, the Son’s begottenness means he came into being. Unfortunately, very few of Arius’ writings are available today. Most of what we know of him comes from second-hand reports.2 Thankfully, Epiphanus of Salamis preserved some of Arius’ letters,3 so by reading Epiphanus we can discover what Arius directly taught. Arius taught concerning the Son, that God “has begotten him not in appearance but in truth and brought him into being, immutable and unalterable, by his own will.”4
Arian theology still persists today. For instance, Jehovah’s Witnesses affirm the same teaching that the Son was created. Their official authority, the Watchtower, claims Jesus “was God’s first creation, and he helped in the creation of all other things. He is the only one created directly by Jehovah and is thus called God’s “only-begotten” Son.”5 Additionally, “He is the Savior, the Son of God, and the firstborn of all creation.” (John 1:34; Colossians 1:15; Acts 5:31) As a created being, he is not part of a Trinity.”6
The Arian viewpoint provides crucial context for the Nicean position. In fact, it is precisely because of false teachings that we need to discuss the Son’s begottenness. Otherwise, we would not dare traverse these theological heights. The Son has always existed as the Son. He is eternally begotten by the Father. How can we explain this truth? How can we speak of an eternal relationship between Father and Son? How can we begin to wrap our minds around such a Being? We must scale the mountain carefully, for many have fallen off the cliff into falsehood. As the church father Hilary of Poitiers writes,
“The guilt of heretics and blasphemers compels us to undertake what is unlawful, to scale arduous heights, to speak of the ineffable, and to trespass upon forbidden places. And since by faith alone we should fulfill what is commanded, namely, to adore the Father, to venerate the Son with him, and to abound in the Holy Spirit, we are forced to raise our lowly words to subjects which cannot be described.”7
The Bible commands us to worship the Father, Son, and Spirit. We must oppose any teaching that undermines our worship. Therefore, with faith and humility, we proclaim the truth about God without pretending to know all the details of how it works. We are standing on Holy ground.
With this foundation in mind, the next article will delve into specific reasons why it is important to affirm that the Son is “begotten, not made.”
- John Alfred Faulkner, “The First Great Christian Creed” in The American Journal of Theology, , Vol. 14, 1910, 1 ↩︎
- Richard Hanson, The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God (Baker Academic: Grand Rapid Michigan, 2005), 5 ↩︎
- Frances Young, From Nicea to Chalcedon, 2nd edition (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2010), 42 ↩︎
- Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion, Bks II & III, translated by Frank Williams (Leiden, The Netherlands: Hotei Publishing. 2009), 338. ↩︎
- Watchtower 3/1/2011, p. 16 Who Is Jesus Christ? ↩︎
- Awake 8/10/2010, p. 8, What Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Believe? jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g201008/what-do-jehovahs-witnesses-believe) ↩︎
- Hilary of Poitiers, The Trinity, Translated by Stephen McKenna, (Reprint with corrections, 1968,
Reprint, Washington, D.C.: CUA Press, 2002), 36 ↩︎
