),
which is therefore no longer found in the newer translations.
One of the most emotional reactions from Muslims are received
when the term "begotten" is mentioned, particularly in the phrase
"only begotten Son" (of God). However, most of these verses
as they refer to Jesus are actually a mistranslation of the
Greek word monogenes (),
which is therefore no longer found in the newer translations.
In The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia in Five Volumes, 1975, Vol A-C, p. 510, we find:
and 
"beget," are frequent in the OT both in the literal
sense (Deut 23:8) and the metaphorical (Job 38:28;
of the deposit of dew). Psalm 2:7 uses the word of
God's relationship to the Messianic king. Perhaps,
in its application to a Davidic king, this was
originally divine "adoption" to sonship; if so
cf. Galatians 4:5. When understood prophetically
of Christ, the word passes far beyond the
adoptionist sense. In the NT, the literal sense
is still common (e.g. Matt 1:1-16) but the
metaphorical use is greatly extended. For instance,
in I Corinthians 4:15 an evangelist may be said
to have "begotten" his converts to new spiritual
life. Corresponding to this "begotten" is the
usual word to describe the relation of the
believers to God (John 1:13, 1 Pet 1:3, etc.)
This means that Christians are 
,
"children" of God (John 1:12).
Christ, by contrast is 
,
"son" of God, to John, but this verb is not used
in the NT to describe God's relationship to Him.
"Only-begotten" (1:14, etc.) is a mistranslation
in older VSS of "only,"
"unique" prob. corresponding to Heb. 
,
of which "beloved" is another NT tr. See also SON OF GOD.
BIBLIOGRAPHY. G. Abbot-Smith, Manual Greek Lexicon of the NT (1937); W. F. Arndt and F. W. Gingrich, Greek-English Lexicon of the NT (1957). [R. A. COLE]
This means in particular that the term "only begotten" found in some translations of John 1:14,18, John 3:16, 1 John 4:9, Hebrews 11:17, etc. is a mistranslation and needs to be better translated as "one and only" or "unique".
Further articles of interest on this topic are:
Recommended reading:
The most detailed scholarly discussion of "monogenes" I have seen is found in "Jesus as God" by Murray J. Harris, pages 84-87, giving a very thorough examination of the linguistic data and references to various journal articles. It is today the scholarly consensus that the word has nothing to do with "begotten", the "genes" part is not even derived from "gennasthai", but from "ginesthai". Also, D.A. Carson's note on John 1:14 is helpful and less technical than Murray.
Murray J. Harris
Jesus as God
The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus
Baker Book House, 1992, ISBN 0-8010-4370-0, pages 84-87
D.A. Carson
The Gospel According To John
Eerdmans, 1991, ISBN 0-8028-3683-6, page 128
Dictionary of Christian terms and concepts
Answering Islam Home Page