The word only-begotten, or monogenēs in the original Greek, has long been the subject of debate and reinterpretation. Over the years, scholars have tried to move away from its literal meaning, suggesting instead that it should be understood figuratively and translated only as “unique.” This modern interpretation, however, adds confusion where none exists if we simply let the Bible define its own terms. The word monogenēs appears only nine times in Scripture—five times referring to Christ, and four times referring to people other than Christ.
To understand how this word applies to Christ, we must first examine the four verses where it is used of others. The first is in Luke 7:12:
“Now when he came nigh to the gate of the city, behold, there was a dead man carried out, the only begotten son of his mother, and she was a widow: and much people of the city was with her.”
A chapter later, in Luke 8:42, we read:
“For he had one only begotten daughter, about twelve years of age, and she lay a dying. But as he went the people thronged him.”
Then in Luke 9:38 it says:
“And, behold, a man of the company cried out, saying, Master, I beseech thee, look upon my son: for he is mine only child.”
Finally, Hebrews 11:17 speaks of Abraham and Isaac:
“By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son.”
In every single one of these cases, monogenēs refers to literal children who were truly born of their parents. The Bible does not use the word figuratively or metaphorically, as many suggest today. This figurative interpretation is not supported by Scripture or by the Spirit of Prophecy. Some argue that monogenēs must only mean “unique” because Isaac is called Abraham’s only begotten son, even though Abraham also had Ishmael. Yet this argument overlooks two points. First, the other three verses clearly refer to actual, literal only children. Second, the real issue is with the word only, not with begotten. Isaac was indeed begotten—literally born of Abraham. The question is: why is he called the only begotten?
To answer this, we must consider whether Isaac was truly Abraham’s only begotten son. Galatians 4 provides clarity:
“For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise… But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.” (Galatians 4:22-23, 29-30)
Was Isaac Abraham’s only begotten son? Absolutely—yes. Ishmael, though biologically Abraham’s child, was never considered the true heir of promise. His birth was the result of Abraham’s lapse of faith, not the fulfillment of God’s word. Ishmael was “born after the flesh” and never counted as the promised seed. His existence was the fruit of human effort, not divine purpose, and therefore, in God’s eyes, Abraham had only one true son: Isaac. This distinction teaches us a powerful lesson. There are no imperfections with God, but man’s unbelief leads to disobedience and error. Ishmael’s story is the record of human impatience, but Isaac’s birth reflects God’s covenant faithfulness. Thus, Isaac stands as Abraham’s only begotten son—not figuratively, but literally, in the eyes of God.
The love of God is beautifully illustrated in this story, and the depth of that lesson is lost if we reduce the meaning of only begotten to a mere figure of speech. Consider the inspired commentary from Patriarchs and Prophets:
“Through type and promise God ‘preached before the gospel unto Abraham.’ Galatians 3:8. And the patriarch's faith was fixed upon the Redeemer to come. Said Christ to the Jews. ‘Your father Abraham rejoiced that he should see My day; and he saw it, and was glad.’ John 8:56, R.V., margin. The ram offered in the place of Isaac represented the Son of God, who was to be sacrificed in our stead. When man was doomed to death by transgression of the law of God, the Father, looking upon His Son, said to the sinner, ‘Live: I have found a ransom.’” (PP 154.1)
Types are prophetic examples pointing to greater realities. The offering of Isaac was a type of God’s own sacrifice in giving His Son. Ellen White explains further:
“It was to impress Abraham's mind with the reality of the gospel, as well as to test his faith, that God commanded him to slay his son. The agony which he endured during the dark days of that fearful trial was permitted that he might understand from his own experience something of the greatness of the sacrifice made by the infinite God for man's redemption. No other test could have caused Abraham such torture of soul as did the offering of his son. God gave His Son to a death of agony and shame. The angels who witnessed the humiliation and soul anguish of the Son of God were not permitted to interpose, as in the case of Isaac. There was no voice to cry, ‘It is enough.’ To save the fallen race, the King of glory yielded up His life. What stronger proof can be given of the infinite compassion and love of God? ‘He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?’ Romans 8:32.” (PP 154.2)
She continues:
“It had been difficult even for the angels to grasp the mystery of redemption—to comprehend that the Commander of heaven, the Son of God, must die for guilty man. When the command was given to Abraham to offer up his son, the interest of all heavenly beings was enlisted. With intense earnestness they watched each step in the fulfillment of this command. When to Isaac's question, ‘Where is the lamb for a burnt offering?’ Abraham made answer, ‘God will provide Himself a lamb;’ and when the father's hand was stayed as he was about to slay his son, and the ram which God had provided was offered in the place of Isaac—then light was shed upon the mystery of redemption, and even the angels understood more clearly the wonderful provision that God had made for man's salvation. 1 Peter 1:12.” (PP 155.2)
Even the angels gained a clearer understanding of God’s plan of salvation through this type. The provision was His only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ. There is nothing figurative about this—Scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy both speak literally. As John 3:16 declares:
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
Ellen White reaffirms this truth:
“God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son,—not a son by creation, as were the angels, nor a son by adoption, as is the forgiven sinner, but a son begotten in the express image of the Father's person.” (Signs of the Times, May 30, 1895)
This statement could not be clearer. Christ is not called the Son of God because He was created, like the angels, nor because He was adopted, as we are when reconciled to God. Rather, He is begotten—brought forth from the very being of the Father, sharing His nature, His image, and His divinity. This is why He can truly reveal the Father to us, for He came forth from God Himself. To strip the word begotten of its plain meaning is to empty this truth of its power, reducing the relationship between Father and Son to a mere metaphor. But inspiration leaves no room for such confusion. Christ’s sonship is real, and it is from this eternal reality that God’s love for the world is best understood—for He gave not a symbolic son, but His very own Son, in whom dwells all the fullness of the Godhead.
May God help us, as He helped Abraham and even the angels, to grasp the reality of this infinite sacrifice. The Father gave His only-begotten Son, not in figure or symbol, but in truth, that we might receive redemption and eternal life through Him alone.