<190207> Psalm 2:7 ? ?I will tell of the decree: Jehovah said unto me, Thou art my Son; This day I have begotten thee? see Alexander, Com. in loco; also Com. on <441333>Acts 13:33 ? ??Today? refers to the date of the decree itself; but this, as a divine act, was eternal ? and so must be the Sonship which it affirms.? Philo says that ?today? with God means ?forever.? This begetting of which the Psalm speaks is not the resurrection for while Paul in <441333>Acts 13:33 refers to this Psalm to establish the fact of Jesus? Sonship, he refers in <441334>Acts 13:34, 35 to another Psalm, the sixteenth, to establish the fact that this Son of God was to rise from the dead. Christ is shown to be Son of God by his incarnation ( <580105>Hebrews 1:5, 6 ? ?when he again bringeth in the firstborn into the world he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him?), his baptism ( <400317>Matthew 3:17 ? ?This is my beloved Son?), his transfiguration ( <401705>Matthew 17:5 ? ?This is my beloved Son?), his resurrection ( <441334>Acts 13:34, 35 ? ?as concerning that he raised him up from the dead? he saith also in another psalm, Thou wilt not give thy Holy One to see corruption?). <510115>Colossians 1:15 ? ?the firstborn of all creation? ? prwto>tokov pa>shv kti>sewv = ?begotten first before all creation? (Julius Muller, Proof-texts, 14); or ?first-born before every creature, i.e., begotten, and that antecedently to everything that was created? (Ellicott, Com. in loco). ?Herein? (says Luthardt, Compend. Dogmatik, 81, on <510115>Colossians 1:15) ?is indicated an ante-mundane origin from God ? a relation internal to the divine nature.? Lightfoot, on <510115>Colossians 1:15, says that in Rabbi Bechai God is called the ?primogenitus mundi.?

On <450104>Romans 1:4 oJrisqe>ntov = ?manifested to be the mighty Son of God?) see Lange?s Com., notes by Schaff on pages 56 and 61. Bruce, Apologetics, 404 ? ?The resurrection was the actual introduction of Christ into the full possession of divine Sonship so far as thereto belonged, not only the inner of a holy spiritual essence, but also the outer of an existence in power and heavenly glory.? Allen, Jonathan Edwards, 353, 354 ? ?Calvin waves aside eternal generation as an ?absurd fiction.? But to maintain the deity of Christ merely on the ground that it is essential to his making an adequate atonement for sin is to involve the rejection of his deity if ever the doctrine of atonement becomes obnoxious? such was the process by which, in the mind of the last century, the doctrine of the Trinity was undermined. Not to ground the distinctions of the divine essence by some immanent eternal necessity was to make easy the denial of what has been called the ontological Trinity, and then the rejection of the economical Trinity was not difficult or far away.?

If Westcott and Hort?s reading oJ monogenh<v Qeo>v , ?the only begotten God,? in <430118>John 1:18, is correct, we have a new proof of Christ?s eternal

<- Previous Table of Contents Next ->

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment