Anthony Buzzard Multimedia • About Anthony Buzzard
PDF Version
<Prev
The Begetting, Coming into Existence, of the Son of God - Page 2
by Anthony Buzzard
Matthew and Luke present us with the true Son of God — a human being who is Son of God by supernatural divine procreation. Later church councils forced on the Church a Son of God whose origin was literally in eternity, by “eternal generation.” The historical Son of God was buried under a strange tradition involving interference with simple words.
Listen to the telling, if rather understated, comment of a leading commentator on Luke 1:35. Ponder this amazing twist suffered by the easy words of Gabriel to Mary: “Later church tradition made something quite other out of this verse” (Fitzmyer, Anchor Bible Commentary). (Sadly, Justin Martyr believed that the spirit and power of God were God the Son preexisting his own birth!)
It is most unwise to begin to contradict these lucid accounts of Matthew and Luke by setting John’s gospel against them! John was fully aware of the accounts of Matthew and Luke and certainly did not imagine setting them aside.
John spoke of the eternal plan of God to procreate His unique Son. John spoke not of a “Word” (capitalized in our translations, with no authority for this in the original Greek!). John did not contradict Matthew and Luke by saying “In the beginning was the Son of God.” He spoke rather of God’s eternal purpose, His word, to bring into existence His uniquely begotten, i.e. fathered, sired, procreated Son. John is in complete agreement with Matthew and Luke and Scripture is not thrown into confusion. The word, the promise of the Son, became the human being, Jesus the Son of God. John simply complements Luke’s and Matthew’s accounts. John is to be read in the light of Matthew and Luke and not twisted in a way which contradicts them. Luke 1:35 gives us an unqualified statement about the basis for which Jesus is the Son of God. It is because he was brought into existence supernaturally by the Father in Mary.
God is the Father of Jesus. Joseph is not his biological father, and Jesus is thus the Son of God.
We are dealing here with extremely simple concepts and words and there is no valid excuse for misunderstanding the easy language of begetting or generating. Does anyone stumble when he reads Proverbs 23:22: “Listen to your father who begat you, and despise not your mother when she is old”?
You and I came into existence when our fathers begat us. So also, according to Matthew and Luke, the Son of God came into existence when God – his Father – begat him in the virgin Mary. This makes him a real human being. The dissolving of the simple word “beget” into nonsense caused a completely erroneous creedal definition of the Son to arise. It was then uncritically accepted as true by billions!
Proverbs 23:23 counsels us to “Get the truth, and sell it not — wisdom, instruction and understanding.” The next verse reads like this: “The father of a just man will exult with glee; he who begets a wise son will have joy in him.” On what possible grounds could one misunderstand the word “beget”? Apply the same simplicity and honesty to Matthew 1:18, 20 and Luke 1:35 and you will have unlocked the secret to who the Son of God is, and the basis for calling him God’s Son. There is no existence of the Son before his coming into existence. That really is not a hard concept. It is laid out for us at the beginning of our New Testaments and confirmed by the whole Bible. By the “beginning” of the New Testament everyone knows I mean Matthew. By the “genesis” (Matt. 1:1, 18) and begetting of the Son of God (Matt. 1:20; Luke 1:35), everyone can know with equal certainty that the Son of God was a procreated person. This event happened some 2000 years ago. Jesus is the man Messiah. There is no other true Messiah.
This precious information was derailed by the hopelessly confusing introduction of an alien meaning of “begetting.” C.S. Lewis, saddled with trying to defend his church tradition, tells us that the begetting of the Son is comparable to two books leaning on each other. They have done this for eternity! But Lewis has butchered the word “beget.” One book leaning on another does not tell us that one book “begat” or “generated” the other! The analogy is false and Matthew’s and Luke’s inspired theology is left in ruins. A return to the sane language of Matthew 1:1, 18, 20 and Luke 1:35 will bring real revival to Bible study and a unifying center for Christian faith. “Theology” (falsely so-called) plunged the Church into confusion from the second century on and the church councils wrote in stone, with threats of excommunication for dissenters, the labored and confusing redefining of the word “beget.”
The origin of the Son of God is not in eternity but in the womb of his mother some 2000 years ago. That means that Jesus really is a human person, not an eternal God-Person with a "generic" humanity! Mary had a baby, and that baby was the son of David, and of Mary and of God. He is the Messiah, our Savior.
Page 1>