John 1:18 - Only Begotten Theos

Some have cited the earlier manuscripts of John 1:18 as proof that Jesus is Yahweh, since some of these manuscripts have "monogenes theos" (transliterated). Yes, there are ancient manuscripts that have "monogenes theos" in John 1:18. Most manuscripts have *huios* (son), but then most of these manuscripts are of more recent dates. For earlier manuscripts that give support for either rendering,
See: http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/contents/reference/mscript1.pdf http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/bsl/Library/Referenc/AVCor/AVcorr.pdf

I couldn't make out some of the coding but I came up with at least the following manuscripts that have "monogenes theos" in John 1:18:
Papyrus 66 containing John 1:1-21:9
Papyrus 75 containing Lk 3:18-Jo 15:8
Vatican 1209
Sinaiticus
Bohairic Coptic

Therefore, we assume that John 1:18 was originally 'only-begotten god [theos, one of might]", which would mean that in the Bible Jesus is not only referred to as the only-begotten son, but also as the only-begotten mighty one [theos]. We should note that there are still other verses than John 1:18 that speak of Jesus as "only begotten son". (In the NAS, see John 3:16,18; Hebrews 11:17) His being "only-begotten mighty one" would not do away with his being "only begotten son," nor contradict each other, nor does it mean that Jesus possesses an alleged "dual nature" of being the Most High and also the son of the Most High. -- Luke 1:32,35.

Before being begotten as a human, Jesus was indeed begotten as the only-begotten THEOS, having been brought forth as the firstborn of every creature (Colossians 1:15), as a mighty spirit being, similar to, but of greater rank than the angels who are called ELOHIM in Psalm 8:5 (see Hebrews 2:7,9). The angels are mighty spirit beings, and thus they are called elohim, which is the same word that is rendered as God [plural intensive, where the plural is used in a singular setting as denoting superiority or the superlative] or gods [plural]. None of these elohim, however, were begotten, brought forth into being, directly by Yahweh, but all these powers of heaven were created through, by means of, the pre-human Jesus. -- Colossians 1:16.

In order to take the meaning of being brought forth into being out of monogenes, some have argued that the word monogenes only signifies "uniqueness", not that Jesus was actually brought forth into being. Kittel's THEOLOGICAL DICTlONARY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT (Vol. 5, pp. 738-741) 1967, a work produced by trinitarians, observes that monogenes can have a broader meaning than only begotten. However, it goes on to state that when monogenes is used in the New Testament, "It means 'only begotten' in (John 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9; John 1:18 the relation of Jesus is not just compared to that of an only child to its father. It is the relation of the only begotten to the father. In John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9 monogenes denotes more than the uniqueness or incomparability of Jesus. In all these verses He is expressly called the Son, and He is regarded as such in John 1:14. In John monogenes denotes the origin of Jesus. He is monogenes as the only begotten."

As Kittel notes, monogenes is used in reference to Jesus in John 1:14,18; 3:16,18; 1 John 4:9. The word monogenes is used of others than Jesus in Luke 7:11,12; 8:41,42; 9:38; Hebrews 11:17. The instances in Luke confirms Kittel's observation that in the New Testament usage, monogenes does generally denote an only begotten son or daughter. Hebrews 11:17 is used of Isaac as the only-begotten son of Abraham, Ishmael no longer being present, and was not counted as heir. -- Genesis 21:10,12; Galatians 4:22,23,30.

Believing that John 1:18 did originally have the word THEOS, does this mean that John was saying that Jesus is Yahweh, the only Most High? No, it only means that John was attributing to Jesus the might, strength, power that he had before coming into the world of mankind to declare his God, and additionally John could also have been referring to the might and power that has been given to him after his resurrection. (Psalm 45:7; Matthew 28:18; Hebrews 1:2,6,9; Philippians 2:9; Colossians 2:10; Psalm 2:7,8; 110:1,2; Isaiah 9:6,7; Luke 1:32; Jeremiah 23:5; Daniel 7:13,14) We need to remember that the Hebrews used the same words for "God" of others than the Most High, but in a secondary sense of might, strength, power.

Realizing that Jesus ascended to the only true God, not that Jesus is the only true God, should tells us that John is not using THEOS of Jesus as he did of the God and Father of Jesus.
See: Hebraic Usage of the Titles for “God”

Jesus in his pre-human existence, indeed, was "a mighty one" who received life (was "begotten") from the Father (Colossians 1:15; John 17:1,3,5), and, not only that, at the time that John wrote his Gospel, Jesus had been raised from death as a mighty spirit being, and was indeed "a mighty one" residing in heaven with his God and Father, and thus figuratively, was in the bosom of his God and Father. -- John 17:11, 22; 20:21,17.
See also my studies:
The Only Begotten God
Did Jesus Have a Beginning?

Some studies written by others:
"The Only Begotten God"
God's Only Begotten Son

John 1:1 and the Son of God, Immanuel

This is in response to:
My Trinity Question

I am not here addressing what is stated there in detail, but mostly giving links to where I have discussed the points before. Please note that I am not just addressing what is present in the original post, but rather what is presented in the comments.

Preliminary:

Jesus is Not Yahweh

The God (Supreme Being – The Might) of Jesus (Scriptures)

Who is Jesus?

John 1:1

John 1:1 proves that Jesus was deity (mighty) with (or towards) the only true Might of the universe (John 1:1,3,5), the source of all might; it does not prove that Jesus is in the only might of the universe.

If Jesus is the Might whom he is with, then Jesus is the Father, for Jesus identified whom he was with in John 17:1,3,5. Jesus was with the only true God, thus, the default is that Jesus is not the only true God whom he was with. Even most trinitarians say that the first theos in John 1:1 is not being used in the same manner as the second theos, for they use their imagination and form the assumption that the first theos is not speaking of three persons, but rather of one of the alleged persons of their triune God, while the second theos does not speak of the three persons, but the alleged second person of their triune God. Nevertheless, it is obvious that the second theos is not used in the same manner as the first theos. In the text John emphasizes the difference between his usage of theos by repeating that the Logos was with God, thus indicating that the Logos was NOT "God" whom he was with, and that "god" applied to the Logos means something different than expressing "the only true God" (John 17:5).

There is Only One True God

The Logos of God

What Beginning?

John 1:1 and Trinitarian Assumptions

The Logos was Theos

John 1:1 - In the Beginning

Hebraic Usage of the Titles for “God”

If Jesus is the Might whom he is with, then Jesus is the Father, for Jesus identified whom he was with in John 17:1,3,5. Jesus was with the only true God, thus, the default is that Jesus is not the only true God whom he was with. Even most trinitarian say that the first theos is not being used in the same manner as the second theos, for they use their imagination and form the assumption that the first theos is not speaking of three persons, but rather of one of the alleged persons of their triune God, while the second theos does not speak of the three persons, but the alleged second persons of their triune God. Yes, it is obvious that the second theos is not used in the same manner as the first theos. In the text John emphasizes the difference between his usage of theos by repeating that the Logos was with God.
http://jesus.rlbible.com/>=tag=john-11

Romans 9:5

See:

Who is Over All

2 Corinthians 3:17

Yahweh, the Spirit

1 Timothy 6:15,16

The Only Ruler Who Possesses Immortality

ELOHIM

Elohim – Does This Word Indicate a Plurality of Persons in a Godhead?

Genesis 1:26 – Let Us and Elohim

Hebrews 1:8 – Why is Jesus called “Elohim” and “Theos”? Psalm 45:6,7

Genesis 1:1 – Elohim

Emmanuel

Matthew 1:23 – Immanuel, God with us

Son of God

In the expression, Son of God, the word "God" signifies one person, not a triune God, which agrees with the usage of the singular word "God" all through the Bible. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is always presented as one person, and not once as more than one person. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is always presented as a distinct individual from His son.

The Unipersonal God Spoke Through His Son

Son of God and Son of Man

John 5:18

The Jewish Leaders' "Cause" to Kill Jesus

I Am

“I am”

Creator

The "all" that the unipersonal God (Colossians 1:2,13-15) created by means of Jesus does not include the first born creature, since it is evident (1 Corinthians 15:27) that God is not created at all, and that Jesus was created before that "all" which was created through, by means of, him. -- Colossians 1:15,17.
http://jesus.rlbible.com/?tag=colossians-116


The all that came into being through Jesus in John 1:3 refers to the world of mankind, as described in John 1:10, and which Jesus refers to in John 17:5. Paul refers to this world in Romans 5:12, showing how it had become corrupted through sin. (see 2 Peter 1:4) Paul again refers to this world in Romans 8:19-22 and refers to this as "all creation" in verse 22. This "all creation", however, does not include the angels, for the angels who see the face of God (Matthew 18:10) have not been subjected to futility. -- Ecclesiastes 1:2,13-15.
http://jesus.rlbible.com/?tag=john-13

Yes, there is only one being in the universe so has not been created. The Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, identifies that one being as one person, and never as more than one person. Nevertheless, while it may be that the thought of self-existence is included in Ehyeh (I am, I will be) and Yahweh (He is, He will be), I believe that the Holy Name declares that the Creator is and will be Who He is, that is, He is and will who He is and thus does not deny Himself (2 Timothy 2:13); His word is trustworthy. -- Isaiah 55:11; Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18.
Focus on the Holy Name

Originally posted 11/13/2010; Updated 11/15/2013

Deuteronomy 6:4 - Elohim and Echad

This is in response to the post entitled:

The Big Bang Theory, The Yankees vs the Tigers, and How can 3=1?

 (1) ELOHIM does not ALWAYS refer to a singular God. Nor does its plural usage mean persons or parts of one God, but rather it designates more than one God, that is, "gods", as in Genesis 31:30; 35:2; Exodus 12:12; 15:11; 18:11; 20:3,23; 22:28; 23:13,24,32,33; 32:1,4,8,23,31; 34:15,16,17; Psalm 82:6, and many, many, other scriptures.

(2) ELOHIM as applied to Jehovah (Yahweh) is used as a plural intensive, that is, with an emphatic singular meaning. Some call this the majestic plural, or emphatic plural, etc. Whatever the usage may be called, it still designates a singular, but intensified or magnified, meaning to a plural form of a word. The usage never designates more than one person or individual as combined in one being.

(3) There are no plural verbs or adjectives in Deuteronomy 6:4 that attend the word "ELOHIM", not unless one refers to the word "our", which reflects the plurality of the people of Israel, not ELOHIM. In verse 3, the Hebrew form (Strong's Hebrew #1696) for "speak, commanded, promised" is singular, "he spoke, commanded, promised", not they spoke, commanded or promised.


See:
Elohim – Does This Word Indicate a Plurality of Persons in a Godhead?
Let Us and Elohim
Why is Jesus called “Elohim” and “Theos”?
One God, One Lord
Hebraic Usage of the Titles for "God"
and
Elohim Created

(4) The application of "compound unity" to the alleged triune God dogma would mean that the Father is NOT GOD, but a part of God; it would mean that the Son is NOT GOD, but a part of God, and that Holy Spirit is NOT GOD, but a part of God. In a compound unity, the various parts do not equal the whole. A grape in one cluster IS NOT THE CLUSTER, but only a small part of the cluster. A grape alone would not be the cluster. Likewise, to apply compound unity to the alleged trinue God would not fit the trinitarian definition of the trinity.

See:
The Meaning of Echad
**

In reality, the Bible no where ever mentions a triune God, not even once. From Genesis to Revelation, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is ALWAYS presented as one individual, one person, and never once is He presented as more than one person or individual. Any such idea as a triune God has to imagined with the spirit of human imagination, assumptions have to be formed beyond what is written, and then what is imagined and assumed has to be added to, and read into, any and every scripture that is thought to teach trinity.

On top of that, the trinity dogma would negate the role of Jesus as the one who condemned sin the flesh. -- Romans 8:3.

See:
How God's Son Condemned Sin in the Flesh
**

In respects the trinitarian teaching that Jesus is still a human being of flesh, this denies the very basis of redemption in the sacrifice of Jesus, for it would mean that either Jesus never completed his offering of himself in sacrifice to his God, or that he took that offering back -- either way it denies the reason that Jesus became flesh.

See:
Jesus Has Come in the Flesh
Jesus Died as a Human Being - Raised As a Spirit Being
Did Jesus Need to be Uncreated to Pay the Price for Sin?
*******
Related:

E.LO.HIM' -- Many Gods in One God? - Chapter 10 of the book, Should Christianity Abandon the Doctrine of the Trinity?

Originally posted: November 18, 2012; Updated: November 15, 2013.