Begotten of God
By Obert Henderson
[Page 44] |
(Editor's Note: For a long time our good friend and brother, Obert Henderson, has expressed discontent with our thinking relative to 1 John 5:1, and submitted this article under the title "Does the Term 'Begotten of God' as Used by John Refer to the Unimmersed Believer?" We are pleased to present it that our readers may have the benefit of his reasoning. Bro. Henderson is a Professor at Colorado State University, and was awarded his doctorate from the University of Oregon in December).
In the December issue of MISSION MESSENGER, the editor, answering a common query regarding how he views the sincere unimmersed believer, cited 1 John 5:1, "Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is begotten of God and he that loves the one who begets loves those who are begotten of him" (ASV). He contends that such people have been begotten of God, but not yet born into his family.
In answer to the next question, "Does not the word for 'begotten' in this verse embrace the whole process of birth?," he replies as follows: "Not at all. Some superficial scholars of our day may so interpret it but the idea that one is 'born of God' is not in the original Greek scriptures at all." He then proceeds to spend considerable time discussing the import of the word gennao, which is translated "begotten" in the above passage, with his conclusion being that gennao cannot be properly rendered by "born" in the passage. In this context he also sets forth his view of what our attitude ought to be toward the pious unimmersed.
I agree wholeheartedly with him that our attitude toward unimmersed believers ought to be one of love, sympathy and understanding, and that we should attempt in meekness, gentleness and kindliness, to assist them to the full obedience of faith. We cannot, consistent with the example of Jesus, abuse and assault them as we have so often been inclined to do. But still there is a question with which we must deal. It is this: is the intent of 1 John 5:1 to teach that unimmersed believers have been begotten of God, but not yet born into his family (in addition to whatever else it might teach)?
The question hinges on whether the term "begotten of God" is used to refer only to the begettal process (and so is used of one in the foetal stage, spiritually) or whether it refers to the consummated process, resulting in one's having been born into the family of God.
The American Standard Version uniformly renders gennao by the word "begotten" when the reference is to God's role in man's new spiritual life. The expression "begotten of God" occurs six times in 1 John. The citation of these passages should help to indicate clearly the sense in which the word is used by John. The passages follow.
"If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that everyone also that doeth righteousness is begotten of him" (1 John 2:29).
"Whosoever is begotten of God doeth
[Page 45] |
"Beloved, let us love one another; for love is of God; and everyone that loveth is begotten of God, and knoweth God" (1 John 4:7).
"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is begotten of God; and whosoever loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him" (1 John 5:1).
"For whatsoever is begotten of God overcometh the world and this is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith" (1 John 5:4).
"We know that whosoever is begotten of God sinneth not; but he keepeth himself, and the evil one toucheth him not" (1 John 5:18).
In five of the six passages above (all except 5:1) the term "begotten of God" very clearly signifies one who has been brought to birth in the family of God, since action is attributed to him that cannot be attributed to a foetus. He "doeth righteousness" (2:29), "doeth no sin" (3:9), "loveth" (4:7), "overcometh the world" (5:4) and "keepeth himself" (5:18). Thus it is evident that the term is used by John, in these five passages, to include the whole process, consummated by birth, and not just the begettal process. It is not used in these passages to refer to one in a foetal stage. Since in five of the six passages, it clearly refers to the whole process, and cannot mean begettal only, by what rule of interpretation can one make the expression "begotten of God" in 1 John 5:1 refer only to the begettal, and thus apply to one in a foetal state?
The editor enunciates three proper rules of interpretation respecting the word gennao. The third of these is: "c. When the entire process, including both the phases of begetting and birth, is described by one word, the final or consummating act may be put for the whole, as in John 3:5." Apparently the scholars who worked on various translations acted on the basis of such a rule when they rendered the word "born" or some equivalent idea in 1 John 5:1. For instance, the King James Version uses the term "is born of God"; Phillips uses "is one of God's family"; the New English Bible uses "is a child of God"; and Montgomery renders it "is a child of God."
It is true that we cannot, strictly speaking, talk of one's being "born" of his father. But it is also true that when the word gennao is used with respect to paternity, it may refer to the whole process of begettal and birth, and so may be viewed as being equivalent to "is a child of." This is the basis for the translations listed above.
All in all then, it seems clear that the term gennao in 1 John 5:1 does not refer to one who has been "begotten" (and thus who is merely in a foetal state) but is intended to describe one who has been begotten and born into the family of God. Therefore, I conclude that the passage has no relevance to the question as to what should be our attitude toward the pious unimmersed. (3117 Sheridan Avenue, Loveland, Colorado 80537).