Trinity Apologetics
Puritan Board Freshman
Hi brothers. Hebrews 1:5 is commonly used by Oneness and Socinian defenders against the eternal Son; attempting to prove the Father-Son relationship had a beginning. It says, " For to which of the angels did He ever say, “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You”? And again, “I will be a Father to Him And He shall be a Son to Me”? " (NASB)
I interpret the first quotation (Ps 2:7) applied to Jesus as metaphorical "begetting" referring to His coronation as king (cf. Ps 2:6): being officially recognized or declared as the Son of God in time (even though He was always the Son of God cf. v2, 8-12) similar (perhaps the same) to Him being declared Son of God because of His resurrection (Acts 13:33, Romans 1:4). The ESV Study Bible essentially agrees with this and Mounce Concise Greek-English Dictionary backs it up (it says, regarding "begotten" [gennaō]), "from the Hebrew, to constitute as son, to constitute as king, or as the representative or viceregent of God, Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:5; 5:5". I think Dr. Michael Brown also agrees but can you guys provide me with names of Calvinist scholars who agree with this interpretation? I assume it's the most common interpretation from Trinitarians anyway. Quotes from them would also be awesome
Also a second quotation (2Sam 7:14) to applied to the Son in this verse. Can I have your opinions on that also? I "will be" and "shall be" is future tense in the Greek, correct? I have a Oneness friend who loves using this to try to prove the Son cannot be eternal. Is it possible that it refers to the humanity of the Messiah? Or is the author's point simply that there is a unique Father-Son relationship that the angels don't have?
Thanks guys!
p.s. Are the Mounce Greek scholars Calvinists? Do you like like them?
I interpret the first quotation (Ps 2:7) applied to Jesus as metaphorical "begetting" referring to His coronation as king (cf. Ps 2:6): being officially recognized or declared as the Son of God in time (even though He was always the Son of God cf. v2, 8-12) similar (perhaps the same) to Him being declared Son of God because of His resurrection (Acts 13:33, Romans 1:4). The ESV Study Bible essentially agrees with this and Mounce Concise Greek-English Dictionary backs it up (it says, regarding "begotten" [gennaō]), "from the Hebrew, to constitute as son, to constitute as king, or as the representative or viceregent of God, Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:5; 5:5". I think Dr. Michael Brown also agrees but can you guys provide me with names of Calvinist scholars who agree with this interpretation? I assume it's the most common interpretation from Trinitarians anyway. Quotes from them would also be awesome
Also a second quotation (2Sam 7:14) to applied to the Son in this verse. Can I have your opinions on that also? I "will be" and "shall be" is future tense in the Greek, correct? I have a Oneness friend who loves using this to try to prove the Son cannot be eternal. Is it possible that it refers to the humanity of the Messiah? Or is the author's point simply that there is a unique Father-Son relationship that the angels don't have?
Thanks guys!
p.s. Are the Mounce Greek scholars Calvinists? Do you like like them?