Re: John 1:18 Monogenes?
Non-anonymous messages may be revised by their author up until a reply is posted. Authors may delete messages within the first hour of their initial posting up until a reply is posted. Anonymous posts may be edited or deleted only within the poster‘s immediate session.
I've updated the word, and this is a repost of the justification posted on John 3:16: Strong's G3439(Greek) "monogenēs" translates I believe as "only born in-kind". The translation of this word is difficult and has been controversial. The first half of the word "mono" clearly means "only" coming from being "one-ly". The second half is unclear, as genes (associated with the word Genesis) incorporats the elements of both being birthed (or born) and being of a kind (or kin)— whereby we also derive the word "kindred". This lack of clarity leads some translators to take the path of translating this word "only born" (hence: only-begotten) while others take the path of "only of kind" (hence: one and only, one of a kind, only). But it can be argued that neither of these completely capture the meaning of the word, as at the time it was in use it was associated phonetically in the original language with both generation and kind, having a source etymologically related. But more important is how the word was used. This word was applied in Hebrews 11:17 to Isaac, the son of Abraham, in a reference to the promise of God— in which Isaac was called Abraham's "monogenēs". However, Isaac was not Abraham's "only born", as Abraham also fathered Ishmael, and fathered him first. Isaac was also not Abraham's "only of kin", as Abraham had other kin (of his kind), such as his brothers Nahor and Haran, and his father Terah. And so rendering monogenēs "only of kin" or "one of kind" or simply "one and only" lacks the element present of also having been generated as seed. This is important, as when those who came up to Jesus asked him to heal their children, they would sometimes say, "He(or she) is my monogenēs.", and the way it was said arguably leaves one with the sense of being an only child and not being an only-of-kin. What Isaac was, however, is the "only born-in-kind" to that of Abraham, which is: He was of Abraham's kin (or kind) first and foremost, but also he was a generated (or birthed) descendant thereof— i.e. a child, as opposed to a brother or sister or father. But in the case of Hebrews 11:17, he was also of Abraham's kind (or kin) in the sense that he was the one descendant through which the promise of God was to be reckoned. So this word also encompassed a spiritually-born kind— through a word that originated as a term where fleshly kin were born (or generated). Jesus therefore, being called God's "only born in-kin" son, can be taken to mean that he is the only son who is born after God's kin (or kind). As Christians we refer to God as our father, and we are called his children, but we were not initially born in-kind to that of God. Although when we become "born from above", we then become part of God's kin (or family kind) through something that has been associated with adoption.
Anonymous posting is currently allowed. Click here to sign-in anonymously.