The only begotten GOD

[Bowman]

I never realized this. John 1:18 says only begotten GOD in most manuscripts, rather than only begotten son.

No one has ever seen God. The only-begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, reveals Him. John 1:18​

Great verse, and one of many stating plainly that Jesus is God.

I prefer this rendering of John 1.18...

θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε μονογενης θεος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο

Theon oudeis heōraken pōpote monogenēs Theos ho ōn eis ton kolpon tou Patros ekeinos exēgēsato

No one has seen God at any time; but the unique One, Himself God, who is in the bosom of the Father, that One declares Him.

 

[EarnestQ]

Well, I have never had much regard for opinions from Irenaeus, but it is true that the Alexandrian based texts read God while the Byzantine based texts read Son.

FWIW, and if I remember correctly, Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the apostle John. That is about all I remember, but if true that should give him some "street cred" in my opinion.

 

[valiant]

FWIW, and if I remember correctly, Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the apostle John. That is about all I remember, but if true that should give him some "street cred" in my opinion.

Irenaeus may be generally reliable but I do not think that the fact that as a young boy he knew Polycarp, who himself knew the Apostles as a young lad adds much to his credibility. The relationship is far too tenuous and distant. He did not even live near him.

its a scholar's argument not a realistic one.

 

[EarnestQ]

Irenaeus may be generally reliable but I do not think that the fact that as a young boy he knew Polycarp, who himself knew the Apostles as a young lad adds much to his credibility. The relationship is far too tenuous and distant. He did not even live near him.

its a scholar's argument not a realistic one.

Thank you. I did not even know that much. I was under the impression he was actually a student of Polycarp, ditto Polycarp of John.

Thanks. I suppose I ought to look it up and learn the truth of the matter.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Thank you. I did not even know that much. I was under the impression he was actually a student of Polycarp, ditto Polycarp of John.

Thanks. I suppose I ought to look it up and learn the truth of the matter.

It's not known with 100% certainty what the relationship was, but this is what Irenaeus wrote to someone he knew. At a minimum, he was certainly close to what Polycarp taught.

“When I was still a boy I saw you [Florinus] in Lower Asia in Polycarp’s company. . . . I can describe the place where blessed Polycarp sat and talked, his goings out and comings in, the character of his life, his personal appearance, his addresses to crowded congregations. I remember how he spoke of his intercourse with John and with the others who had seen the Lord; how he repeated their words from memory; and how the things that he had heard them say about the Lord, His miracles and His teaching, things that he had heard direct from the eye-witnesses of the Word of Life, were proclaimed by Polycarp in complete harmony with Scripture.”​

 

[EarnestQ]

It's not known with 100% certainty what the relationship was, but this is what Irenaeus wrote to someone he knew. At a minimum, he was certainly close to what Polycarp taught.

“When I was still a boy I saw you [Florinus] in Lower Asia in Polycarp’s company. . . . I can describe the place where blessed Polycarp sat and talked, his goings out and comings in, the character of his life, his personal appearance, his addresses to crowded congregations. I remember how he spoke of his intercourse with John and with the others who had seen the Lord; how he repeated their words from memory; and how the things that he had heard them say about the Lord, His miracles and His teaching, things that he had heard direct from the eye-witnesses of the Word of Life, were proclaimed by Polycarp in complete harmony with Scripture.”​

Thank you. Great piece of historical info.

 

[valiant]

It's not known with 100% certainty what the relationship was, but this is what Irenaeus wrote to someone he knew. At a minimum, he was certainly close to what Polycarp taught.

“When I was still a boy I saw you [Florinus] in Lower Asia in Polycarp’s company. . . . I can describe the place where blessed Polycarp sat and talked, his goings out and comings in, the character of his life, his personal appearance, his addresses to crowded congregations. I remember how he spoke of his intercourse with John and with the others who had seen the Lord; how he repeated their words from memory; and how the things that he had heard them say about the Lord, His miracles and His teaching, things that he had heard direct from the eye-witnesses of the Word of Life, were proclaimed by Polycarp in complete harmony with Scripture.”​

Exactly. He was for a short time with Florinus as a boy and while he was with him heard Polycarp discoursing. He wrote his own words from a more mature position a long time afterwards. Nothing in that can give any confidence that he actually learned much of substance from Polycarp. He was too young.

 

[oldhermit]

FWIW, and if I remember correctly, Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the apostle John. That is about all I remember, but if true that should give him some "street cred" in my opinion.

Never measure credibility by one's associations. One's credibility can only be measured by what he teaches with regard to what scripture reveals.

 

[oldhermit]

FWIW, and if I remember correctly, Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the apostle John. That is about all I remember, but if true that should give him some "street cred" in my opinion.

I suppose I should qualify my statement a little more clearly so that I am not misunderstood. I hold no disrespect for Irenaeus, it is simply that I hold his opinions no higher than those of any other uninspired teacher no matter who his associations may have been.