If we believe in eternal generation—that the Father eternally...
Mike Riccardi@MikeRiccardi_
14 views
Jul 28, 2024
~2 min read
Advertisement
1
If we believe in eternal generation—that the Father eternally communicates the undivided and underived divine essence to the Son—are we somehow saying the Father brought the Son into existence? How can the Son “receive” the divine essence if He always had it? (1/10)
2
How can we speak of the 𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 of an eternal, uncreated Word?
The answer is: we have to speak of 𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭 generation.
God the Father doesn’t generate God the Son in a manner that is one-to-one identical with human generation. (2/)
The answer is: we have to speak of 𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭 generation.
God the Father doesn’t generate God the Son in a manner that is one-to-one identical with human generation. (2/)
3
Human generation
1. has a beginning;
2. happens at a single point in time;
3. requires that a father exist before his son exists; and
4. requires a mother. (3/)
1. has a beginning;
2. happens at a single point in time;
3. requires that a father exist before his son exists; and
4. requires a mother. (3/)
4
But none those things is true of the eternal generation of God the Son. This is an incomprehensible, eternal communication of the divine essence.
It is has no beginning. There is no single point in time when it takes place. The Father did not exist before the Son. (4/).
It is has no beginning. There is no single point in time when it takes place. The Father did not exist before the Son. (4/).
5
There was never a time that the Father wasn’t the Father, and so there was never a time that the Son wasn’t the Son. He is “begotten, 𝘯𝘰𝘵 made,” as the Nicene Creed says. (5/)
6
“But why use the term 𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 if you have to qualify it so heavily?”
One, because it’s the term Scripture uses. “Only begotten” (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9) translates 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦̄𝘴—from 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘴, “only,” and 𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘯𝘢𝘰̄, “to beget.” (6/)
One, because it’s the term Scripture uses. “Only begotten” (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9) translates 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦̄𝘴—from 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘴, “only,” and 𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘯𝘢𝘰̄, “to beget.” (6/)
Mike Riccardi@MikeRiccardi_
Some argue that the term 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦̄𝘴 is better translated as “unique” or “one of a kind,” because they believe the compound word comes from 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘴, “only,” and 𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘰𝘴, “kind.” I disagree. (1/)
7
And also because generation does communicate the concepts of consubstantiality and fromness that characterize the eternal begetting of the Son by the Father. (7/)
Mike Riccardi@MikeRiccardi_
Scripture calls the Father “Father” and the Son “Son” because
(1) a son has the 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 as his father,
but a son has that nature (2) 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 his father.
Consubstantiality (i.e., sameness of nature), and “fromness.” (1/7)
(1) a son has the 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 as his father,
but a son has that nature (2) 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 his father.
Consubstantiality (i.e., sameness of nature), and “fromness.” (1/7)
8
In fact, the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son is how Christians 𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘥 the doctrine of the Arians, who seized on Scripture’s “generation” language to say that there was a time when the Son was not. (8/)
9
IOW, if generation entails consubstantiality & fromness, then 𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭 generation entails 𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭 consubstantiality & 𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭 fromness. Precisely because this communication of essence is eternal, the Son 𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘵 be “less than” the Father in any way. (9/)
10
So, so far from eternal generation entailing the creation, subjection, or subordination of the Son, eternal generation is the orthodox 𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 of each of these ideas, and the safeguard of the Son’s genuine equality with and distinction from the Father. (10/10)