I’d like you to put your thinking caps on this morning. I have a gospel message for you, but it is not a “simple” gospel message. I need all of you to engage your ears and hearts, turning up your hearing aids if necessary.
When Mary gave birth, more than 2,000 years ago, Matthew said that the baby was her “firstborn son.” Then in Luke 2 we read: “And while they were there in Bethlehem, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.” In both verses, the Greek word translated “first-born” is “prototokos.” – “proto” – speaking of first.
There are a couple implications coming from these words. For example, there is the idea that Mary never had children before. The truth is, she was a virgin, in the absolute sense of the word. Mary never had a baby before the birth of Jesus, furthermore she never had a relationship with a man. Although espoused to be married, neither she nor Joseph considered this to be a full marriage license. Don’t let anyone deceive you into thinking the word “virgin” should not be found in the Bible as a description of Mary before Jesus’ birth.
The second implication of “prototokos” is that there were more children born later. That is not necessarily demanded by the Greek word, but it is implied. I know there are some churches which deny Mary bore other children for Joseph. But the scriptures outweigh tradition, and the Bible is clear that Jesus had brothers and sisters. In Matthew 13:55 – the Jews were asking, “Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?” James and the three others were half-brothers, and the next verse talks about his sisters – children of Mary. Like lots of siblings, at first, they were thorns in the side of their elder brother. But over time, some of them proved to be a great blessing to the cause of Christ. To Mary, Jesus was her “prototokos” – her firstborn.
I think it is interesting the Bible does not use any other Greek word to speak of Jesus’ relationship to Mary. He wasn’t her little “punkin,” or her “sweetie,” “honey pie” or “love bug.” And He wasn’t her “saviour” either – at least not yet. But neither was Jesus Mary’s “only begotten child” – her “monogenace.” That is a Greek word used to describe other relationships, but not of the one between Jesus and Mary. There is a great gap between “first born” and “only begotten” – a gap so large that all eternity could fit between them – at least in the case of Christ Jesus. But once again, Jesus was NOT Mary’s “only begotten” because there were other children in the family.
Why is it that some deny the obvious in regard to the family and the other children of Joseph and Mary? It appears to be an undue and unjust veneration of Mary. Are you familiar with the evolution of the Catholic Doctrines about Mary? She was first, officially, called the “Mother of God” at the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD. But Mary was never really the mother of God – that would make her greater than or superior to God. Mary was the mother of the human body of Jesus. But the Son of God only became INCARNATE through the body Mary provided. He was the Son of God long before He became the little baby in Mary’s womb. More about that in a few minutes.
Back to Catholicism – people began to direct their prayers toward Mary about the year 600 AD. “The Ave Maria” was introduced as Catholic doctrine as late as 1508 AD. And the immaculate conception of Mary was proclaimed by Pius IX less than two hundred years ago. There is no Biblical reason to give Mary divine abilities or a divine nature. AND there is no reason to shield Mary from normal motherhood and ordinary Christianity. I believe that Mary is with the Lord today, not because she gave birth to Jesus, but because Christ Jesus is her Lord and Saviour.
Now, a moment ago I said that “monogenace.” is not a word used in regard to Jesus as Mary’s son. He was not her “only begotten” child in any sense of the word. But that word IS used nine times in the Bible and five times in regard to Christ. When used of Christ it is not speaking about Mary’s Son, it is speaking about the Son of God. I’m going to repeat that, because it is the key to this message this morning – “Monogenace.” – translated “only begotten” – speaks about the Son OF God, but not the son OF Mary.
A few minutes ago we read from those cherished words of John 3 – “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.” My theme this morning is this – the faith which saves the sinner is faith which is placed upon the “monogenace.” of God – “the only begotten” of God. That is what John 3:16 clearly says, but which most people never consider. I don’t mean that someone must be able to define and extemporize upon the Doctrine of Christ. But the man who denies or limits Christ as the “only Begotten Son” is an heretic. As John has written in another place – “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.”
So, Who is the Only Begotten?
In John 9, Christ met a man who had been born blind, and He asked – “Do you believe on the Son of God?” The poor confused, but courageous, young man replied: “Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on Him.” Who is the Son of God? Who is the only begotten Son – the “monogenace?”
As I mentioned earlier, there are nine verses which use the Greek word “monogenace” – “only begotten.” Three times Luke uses the word when speaking about some specific small families. Christ met a widow from Nain whose only son – her “monogenace” had died. And Jairus came to Christ beseeching Him for a miracle – “For he had one only daughter (monogenace), about twelve years of age, and she lay a dying.” And then a chapter later behold, “a man of the company cried out, saying, Master, I beseech thee, look upon my son: for he is mine only child” – my “monogenace.” These three references help us to understand the word on a human level. There are six other verses which speak of “monogenace” but they are references to Christ Jesus.
I John 4:9 is the last use of the word in the Bible. “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.” There can be no doubt about the person to whom John refers – Jesus Christ, the Son of God. “God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we yet sinners Christ died for us.” “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” The “only begotten Son” of I John 4:9 is the Lord Jesus Christ.
In the Gospel of John, chapter One, verses 14 and 18 we find the word again. “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.” Who is this glorious person John calls “the Word?” The context clearly shows us Jesus Christ. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” He came unto own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.” And what is that name? Jesus Christ, the Son of God. John 1:18 is a statement coming out of the ministry of John the Baptist. “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” We are told here that the “only begotten” was the reason for John’s ministry. John came to prepare the way of the Lord – preparing the way for the “monogenace.” Other references are found in John 3:16 and penultimately in John 3:18. “He that believeth on him (Christ) 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.” In Whom are required to place our faith if we desire to be saved from our sin? The Lord Jesus Christ. He is the Word, the “monogenace” – the only begotten Son of God.
But that doesn’t yet answer the question: What is the significance of “Only Begotten Son of God?”
As the words roll off our tongues, they sound like a denial of Jesus’ deity. “Only begotten” leads to thoughts about the “Son of God” and God – the Father. And if we aren’t thinking clearly, these imply a derived existence – God the Father begat the Son. It can implies that there once was a day when there was ONLY the Father, and there was no divine Son. But then God the Father sired an infant God – a child-God – Jesus the Son of God.
I hope you can see that there are all kinds of theological and philosophical problems in thinking like this. To say that God the Father begat a divine son, suggests He was not “the Father” before there was a Son. But the Bible speaks about “the everlasting Father.” And actually, an everlasting or eternal Father, demands and equally everlasting and eternal Son. The fact is – there has never been a moment in time or eternity when Christ was not the Son of God. To say that God the Father begat a Divine Son, says that God was not the Father until there was a Son. But perhaps a more significant problem arises when we start looking for God the mother. I am not talking about Mary, but the wife of God, who bore the Son of God before Creation. Of course there isn’t any divine mother, nor has there ever been a need for one. Christ has always been the Son of God, and did not come to that title through any process of conception and divine birth.
Now you may be thinking that all of this is theological nonsense – “much ado about nothing.” You may be thinking that I am wasting your perfectly good Sunday morning. But I remind you of 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.” If saving faith must be placed in God’s only begotten Son, then we need to understand and identify Him.
So what is the meaning of the statement – Christ is the “only begotten of Father?” It all boils down to the fact that this is a very special and unique relationship. I have already taken you to the three scriptures which do not directly relate to Christ. The widow of Nain; the ruler of the synagogue and another desperate man who was about to loose his daughter. In each case there was only one child in the family. But more than that – there was a bond between the parent and the child which laid those parents near death’s door themselves if they lost that child. These people’s lives were contained and confined to their children – the only child in their families. In essence, without their children their lives would virtually end.
If you’ve been doing your math this morning, you might have noticed that there is yet one more reference. I’ve withheld Hebrews 11:17 until now, because it ties together the special “only begotten son” of Abraham and the even more special “only begotten Son of God.” “By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called: Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.” Here is the clinching statement about the meaning of “monogenace” when it comes to the Son of God. Despite what Hebrews 11 says, Isaac was NOT the only son fathered by Abraham, because there was another earlier baby named “Ishmael.” But Isaac was Abraham’s life and future; He was the man’s seed and the fulfillment of God’s promise. “Monogenace.” speaks of a special love, a special relationship which cannot be explained any other way. This is why the word is used to speak of Christ’s relationship to God the Father.
But there is more– the word denotes that Father and Son share the same nature. Christ was not a mere angel as some heretics claim. No, He was and still is the Son of His Father, that is – Deity. When Christ told the Jews He was the Son of MAN, He claimed He was fully human. But when He called Himself the Son of God, those Jews knew He was declaring himself to be fully God. The terms “Son of God” and “only begotten,” do not limit the deity of Christ one iota, rather they enhance everything. Whatever abilities and attributes you can find in God the Father, you can find in Christ. You find every attribute of deity in the person of Lord Jesus, the Son of God.
So not unexpectedly, we find that “only begotten” implies resemblance to the Father. And without a doubt there was an unbroken intimacy between them – even when Christ was upon earth. There was intimacy and unbridled affection too. There was a community of authority, and a complete match of will and purpose.
There never has been a human father closer in any way to his human son as are God the Father to God the Son in their divine relationship. The words “only begotten” don’t imply superiority and inferiority. They speak of exactly the opposite – an unbreakable bond and unity. Our problem with the words is that we try to define them according to human standards. “Monogenace” is an accommodation of words to suit our kindergarten minds.
On the other hand, the word does also denote an important distinction. God the Father is one person, and God the Son is another. They are one God, but they are two of three persons in the God-head. Besides: what shall we call each of the Trinity if not Father, Son and Holy Spirit? Shall we call them 1, 2 and 3? God 1, God 2 and God 3. Besides the fact that this implies three gods, there would still be superiority one over another. Shall we call them Bob, Frank and Earnest? Animal, vegetable and mineral? There needs to be some distinctive titles in order to separate each member of the Trinity. Father, Son and Spirit, are quite adequate, provided we don’t limit their definitions to purely human definitions.
But let us get back to John 3:16 and 18.
“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.” “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.” Have no fear, I believe in sovereign election and irresistible grace, but these are not my subject today. What I am trying to say – it is to the Only Begotten Son of God that God’s elect must look for deliverance from sin. It is to the dearest in Heaven or earth that we must turn. It is to the Creator, the Sustainer of the Universe. It cost the Father the apple of His eye to purchase our sinful souls from the judgment our sins deserve. It is difficult to express the bond between Holy God and the perfect sacrifice any better than to say Christ is the “Only Begotten Son.” No wonder there is eternal wrath in store for the sinner who spits on His sacrifice. “He that believeth not the Son is condemned already, because he hath not believed in name of the only begotten Son of God.”
Won’t you surrender to the Saviour this morning?