[B-Greek] Unique Vs. Begotten
Christopher Skinner
threeskinners at msn.com
Wed Jun 8 14:59:17 EDT 2005
Something is confusing to me in this whole discussion. I am hoping for some
clarification. I was under the impression (or maybe suffering from the
delusion) that the term monogenes was a compound term coming from monos
(one) and genos (class/kind as in the fourth entry in BDAG, p. 194). Thus,
when I thought of the translational option "unique" I have always thought in
terms of quality not quantity (and have always been somewhat confused by the
NIV's rendering, "one and only"). However, just now I looked in the English
dictionary and the first entry under "unique" in Webster's New World
Dictionary is "one and only." The second entry in Webster is "having no like
or equal; unparalleled."
My question is: When we see monogenes, (assuming it is being understood in
the sense of "unique" which not everyone agrees with), which sense of the
term "unique" is more appropriate? I ask this question in light of the usage
in Hebrews 11:17 where Isaac is described simply as "monogenh." Clearly the
writer of Hebrews is familiar enough with the Hebrew Scriptures to recognize
that Isaac is not the "one and only" son of Abraham in a physical sense.
Would this make him "unique" in the sense of quality?
So my question restated is this: Assuming we (1) Understand monogenes as
formed from monos and genos; and (2) decide to translate that in the sense
of "unique", is it more appropriate that we use "unique" in reference to
quantity (i.e., "one and only") or quality ("one of a kind")?
Hope my question is clear and not too muddled. Thanks in advance for any
clarification.
Christopher W. Skinner
Ph.D. candidate
The Catholic University of America
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list