Monogenēs

The entrance of "only begotten" into the English Bible was not directly from mono-genes but from the Latin of the Vulgate, which had uni-genitus (one-begotten):[15]

• John 3:16 sic enim dilexit Deus mundum ut Filium suum unigenitum daret ut omnis qui credit in eum non pereat sed habeat vitam aeternam. (Latin Vulgate)
• John 3:16 God lufede middan-eard swa þæt he sealde hys akennedan sune þæt nan ne for-wurðe þe on hine ge-lefð. Ac habbe þt eche lyf. (Hatton Gospels c.1160 AD)
• John 3:16 For God lovede so the world, that he yaf his oon bigetun sone, that each man that bileveth in him perishe not, but have everlastynge lijf.(Wycliffe's Bible 1395 AD)

The meaning of monogenēs was part of early Christian christological controversy regarding the Trinity. It is claimed that Arian arguments that used texts that refer to Christ as God's "only begotten Son" are based on a misunderstanding of the Greek word monogenēs[16] and that the Greek word does not mean "begotten" in the sense we beget children but means "having no peer, unique".[17][18]

Alternatively in favour that the word monogenēs does carry some meaning related to begetting is the etymological origin mono- (only) + -genes (born, begotten).[19] The question is whether the etymological origin was still "live" as part of the meaning when the New Testament was written, or whether semantic shift has occurred. Limiting the semantic change of monogenes is that the normal word monos is still the default word in New Testament times, and that the terms co-exist in Greek, Latin and English:

Greek monos → Latin unicus → English "only"

Greek monogenes → Latin unigenitus → English "only-begotten"

Also there is a question about how separate from the idea of -genes birth and begetting the cited uses of monogenes in the sense of "unique" truly are. For example, the ending -genes is arguably not redundant even in the sense of "only" as per when Clement of Rome (96 AD), and later Origen, Cyril and others, employ monogenes to describe the rebirth of the phoenix. At issue is whether Clement is merely stressing monos unique, or using monogenes to indicate unique in its method of rebirth, or possibly that there is only one single bird born and reborn. Likewise in Plato's Timaeus, the "only-begotten and created Heaven", is still unique in how it is begotten, in comparison to the begetting of animals and men, just as Earth and Heaven give birth to Ocean and Tethys. Of the Liddell Scott references for "unique" (monogenes being used purely as monos) that leaves only Parmenides, which (as above) is no longer considered a likely reading of the Greek text.

Additionally the New Testament frame of reference for monogenes is established by uses of the main verb "beget", and readings of complementary verses, for example:

Heb. 1:5 "For unto which of the angels said he at any time, "Thou art my Son (uios mou ei su), this day have I begotten thee (ego semeron gegenneka se)"? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?" (citing Ps.2:7, also cited Acts 13:33, Heb.5:5)

1 John 5:18 "We know that everyone who is begotten of God does not sin" or

1 John 5:18 "We know that the One who is begotten of God does not sin" [20]

This issue overlaps with, and is interrelated with, the question of begetting above. Interpretation of the uniqueness of monogenes in New Testament usage partly depends on understanding of Hellenistic Jewish ideas about inheritance. Philo stated:

• On Abraham 194: "In the second place, after he [Abraham] had become the father of this [Isaac] his loved-and-only (agapetos kai monos) son, he, from the moment of his birth, cherished towards him all the genuine feelings of affection, which exceeds all modest love, and all the ties of friendship which have ever been celebrated in the world."[21]
• On Sacrifice X.(43): "And he [Jacob] learnt all these things from Abraham his grandfather, who was the author of his own education, who gave to the all-wise Isaac all that he had, leaving none of his substance to bastards, or to the spurious reasonings of concubines, but he gives them small gifts, as being inconsiderable persons. For the possessions of which he is possessed, namely, the perfect virtues, belong only to the perfect and legitimate son;"[22]

In his 1894 translation of Philo Charles Duke Yonge rendered "loved-and-only son" (agapetos kai monos uios) as "only legitimate son", which is not unreasonable given Philo's parallel comments in On Sacrifice X.43. It also parallels Josephus' use (see above 20:20) for a legitimate son of the main royal wife.

Likewise in the later Jewish Septuagint revisions:

• Gen 22:2 of Aquila "take your son Isaac, your only-begotten (monogenes) son whom you love"
• Gen 22:12 of Symmachus "now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only-begotten (monogenes) son, from me.”

In contrast in Proverbs 4:3 Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion all have monogenes of a mother's only-begotten son where legitimacy is not an issue.

In textual criticism, opinions are divided on whether Jesus is referred to as "only-begotten God" or "only-begotten Son", in John 1:18.[23] According to the majority of modern scholars the external evidence favors monogenês theos as the original text. This reading exists primarily in the Alexandrian text-types. Textus Receptus, the manuscript tradition behind the KJV and many other Bibles, reads ho monogenês huios. This reading ranks second in terms of the number of manuscripts containing it, and has a wider distribution among text-types.[24]

• monogenes theos P75, P66, Vaticanus, Sinaiticus etc.
• o monogenes uios Alexandrinus, Textus Receptus, Peshitta etc.

This textual issue is complicated by the scribal abbreviations of nomina sacra where "G-d" and "S-n" are abbreviated in the Greek manuscripts by ΘΣ and ΥΣ (theta-sigma vs upsilon-sigma) increasing the likelihood of scribal error.[25]