"You are My Son, Today I have begotten You" Fulfilled

Acts 13:32-33 states that the promise to the ancient Hebrews was fulfilled as it is written in Psalm 2:7; this is what it says:

Acts 13:32-33 And we preach to you the good news of the promise made to the fathers, that God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, 'You are my son; today I have begotten you.'

But the time of this promise's fulfillment is controversial. Here are the three competing views on the time this promise was fulfilled (or on the event that fulfilled this promise):

Promise Fulfilled at the Birth of Jesus

Some argue that the promise made to the ancient Jews was fulfilled at the birth of Jesus, since the Psalm says clearly that Jesus became at a certain date the son of God. When Luke writes that an angel appeared to Mary announcing the birth of Jesus, it has the angel saying that Jesus will be called "the Son of the Most High":

Luke 1:30-32 The angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary; for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David;

The birth of Jesus allowed all the messianic prophecies to be later fulfilled in him. But what about the fact that Paul says that "today I have begotten you" has been fulfilled by God by "raising up Jesus"?

It is pointed out that this language does not always indicate resurrection, as it may appear at first sight. This expression is used in other places without the meaning of resurrecting somebody from the dead. One example would be verse 22:

Acts 13:22 After He had removed him, He raised up David to be their king, concerning whom He also testified and said, 'I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after my heart, who will do all My will.'

Indeed, this verse does not say that God resurrected David. The Greek word translated as "raised up" is anistemi, and according to BDAG it not only means "to raise up by bringing back to life", but also "to cause to appear for a role or function". Another verse that employs this meaning - and refers to Jesus - is Acts 3:22:

Acts 3:22 Moses said, 'the Lord God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brethren; to him you shall give heed to everything He says to you'.

The problem with this interpretation is that just because "raising up" may not always mean "resurrection", it does not follow that it means birth. Acts 13:22 does not say that David was born to be king of the Jews, but that God brought him on the scene with the purpose of him being king to them. This happened not when he was born, but when he was anointed by Samuel. That corresponds indeed to the meaning of "to cause to appear for a role or function".

Similarly, Acts 3:22 says about Jesus that God will raise up "a prophet". Was he a prophet in the real sense of the word the moment he was born? Did he prophesy anything as a new born? He became a prophet after his baptism at the age of 30, when God's spirit descended on him.

Another instance of this verb being used in this way is Acts 5:36:

Acts 5:36 For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and a group of about four hundred men joined up with him. But he was killed, and all who followed him were dispersed and came to nothing.

It is clear that Gamaliel does not talk here about Theudas' birth.

As it is obvious, BDAG says anistemi also means resurrection, "to raise up by bringing back to life". Examples of this usage can be found all over the NT. Here is one:

Acts 2:31-32 [David] looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that he was neither abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh suffer decay. This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses.

So another problem with the idea of birth as the time of the fulfillment is that the context speaks of Jesus being killed and resurrected, therefore making anistemi mean resurrection highly probable:

Acts 13:28-37 And though they found no ground for putting Him to death, they asked Pilate that He be executed.

When they had carried out all that was written concerning Him, they took Him down from the cross and laid Him in a tomb. But God raised Him from the dead; and for many days He appeared to those who came up with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem, the very ones who are now His witnesses to the people.

And we preach to you the good news of the promise made to the fathers, that God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, 'You are my son; today I have begotten you.'

As for the fact that He raised Him up from the dead, no longer to return to decay, He has spoken in this way: 'I will give you the holy and sure blessings of David.'

Therefore He also says in another Psalm, 'You will not allow Your holy one to undergo decay.' For David, after he had served the purpose of God in his own generation, fell asleep, and was laid among his fathers and underwent decay; but He whom God raised did not undergo decay.

For how can 'You are my son; today I have begotten you" be fulfilled at resurrection, please see Begetting at Resurrection.

Promise Fulfilled When Jesus is Brought on the Scene by God

Others argue that the meaning of "raise up" in Acts 13:33 is not the resurrection one, but "to cause to appear for a role or function", another meaning of anistemi. According to this interpretation, the fulfillment of the promise encompasses the fulfillment of every messianic prophecy - the birth, the preaching, the healing, the death and the resurrection.

It is argued that the larger context of Acts 13 is pointing to the identity of Jesus as being the Messiah, but this does not explain how exactly "You are my son; today I have begotten you" is being fulfilled in Jesus being brought on the scene by God, if this doesn't mean his birth.

While Paul says in verse 22 that David was "raised up" by God, therefore being brought on Israel's scene, Paul does not say next that Jesus was "raised up" by God being brought on Israel's scene. He instead says:

Acts 13:23 From the descendants of this man, according to promise, God has brought to Israel a Savior, Jesus

When Paul wants to convey the idea that Jesus was brought on the scene of Israel as a savior, he chooses to say exactly that: "brought", probably because he does not want create confusion between "raised up" in the sense of being brought on the scene and "raised up" from the dead. In regard to David he can use "raised up" in the sense of being brought on the scene for there can be no confusion here with David's resurrection, everybody knows David was not resurrected.

So the fact that Paul already talked about Jesus being brought on the scene in verse 23 would make verse 33 redundant if it also means that Jesus was brought on the scene. Likewise, verse 33 is again made redundant if the fulfillment of the promise means fulfillment of the messianic prophecies as a whole, because Paul already mentioned the fulfillment of messianic prophecies in verses 27 to 29:

Acts 13:27-29 For those who live in Jerusalem, and their rulers, recognizing neither Him nor the utterances of the prophets which are read every Sabbath, fulfilled these by condemning Him. And though they found no ground for putting Him to death, they asked Pilate that He be executed. When they had carried out all that was written concerning Him, they took Him down from the cross and laid Him in a tomb.

Furthermore, as pointed out above, the immediate context of Acts 13:33 is specifically the resurrection of Jesus, beginning with verse 30, this topic of resurrection continuing well after verse 33, up until verse 37. Therefore it would be more likely that Paul, by mentioning the raising up of Jesus, stays on the subject of resurrecting Jesus from the dead and does not deviate from it.

Promise Fulfilled by God Raising Up Jesus From the Dead

Still others argue that the promise made by God was fulfilled by Jesus being raised up from the dead, not merely "raised up" by being brought on the scene. In favor of this it is argued that the immediate context is the resurrection of Jesus, verse 33 being in the middle of this topic - see above.

It is argued that without the resurrection of Jesus, all God's promises to Israel are in vain, there is no salvation, as Paul said:

But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain. […] If Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. (1 Corinthians 15:13-14 ,17-18)

It is the resurrection of Jesus that makes valid all other promises God made. Without it, not one stands. It is the fulfillment of the resurrection promise (made in Psalm 16:10 and Isaiah 53:10-12) that renders all the other promises made by God as relevant.

It is indeed only the last in a chain of promises related to the Messiah's earthly course, that fulfilled the promise of God. If the "promise" Paul mentions in Acts 13:33 is in fact all the promises of God viewed as a whole, it would be beneficial to see just what "fulfillment" means when applied to something that is comprised of many events, a chain or succession of events.

Fulfillment of a Chain of Events

The Greek word translated as "fulfilled" is ekpleroo (ἐκπληρόω); it is in fact a composite verb, composed of the words: ek + pleroo. Ek means "out" and pleroo means "to make full, fill (full)", so together they literally mean "to out-fulfill" something. BDAG says it means "to fulfill". It also says that another closely related meaning is "to bring to completion".

In the NT it only appears in Acts 13:33. Most of the time, the NT simply says pleroo, without the preceding ek, when it wants to say something is fulfilled, or is filled full. From the way this word is used by the NT and the Septuagint in relation to a chain of events/days/elements, one can determine when exactly the fulfillment of these actually occurs.

Take for example the fulfillment of a number of days, as it appears in the Septuagint (Brenton's translation):

Genesis 29:21 And Jacob said to Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in to her.

As verse 18 shows, Jacob had to serve Laban seven years, that is 2520 days, in order to marry his daughter Rachel. When were the 2520 days fulfilled? On the first day? The event that marked the fulfillment of these days was the passing of the last day, the 2520^th one. Another example:

Genesis 50:2-3 And Joseph commanded his servants the embalmers to embalm his father; and the embalmers embalmed Israel. And they fulfilled forty days for him, for so are the days of embalming numbered;

Again, the fulfillment of the 40 days was accomplished by the passing of the 40^th day. Just as the last drop of water fills full a glass of water, without this last day, the desired period of time is not fulfilled. The pouring of the last drop of water fills the glass. Of course, each single day before the last one came to pass, they all happened. But the period of time - all the days viewed as a whole - was fulfilled only and only, by the passing of the last day.

Other examples of a period of time being fulfilled can be found at Leviticus 12:4; 25:29, etc...

Another use for this word:

Luke 7:1 When He had completed all His discourse in the hearing of the people, He went to Capernaum.

The translation of pleroo in this case reminds us that BDAG said ekpleroo also means "to bring to completion". Keeping in mind that we start with the assumption that the promise of Acts 13:33 is composed of all the promises of God mentioned in diferent prophecies, let us note that Jesus' discourse was composed of multiple statements. His discourse was brought to completion only by its last statement; the event that brought his discourse to completion was Jesus expressing the last statement in this string of statements. It's not that the previous statements were not expressed by him, it's that his discourse was completed (fulfilled) by the final statement.

Another example of pleroo usage:

John 3:29 He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom's voice. So this joy of mine has been made full.

As verse 26 shows, John the Baptist's joy was made full by the fact that Jesus was baptizing and people were coming to him. It's not that John had no joy in Jesus before Jesus started baptizing, but this joy was made full (filled full, fulfilled) only with the start of Jesus baptizing. Therefore the event that made his joy full was Jesus baptizing and people coming to him.

The same idea is expressed by other verses, which use the same pleroo:

Philippians 2:2 make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose.

2 John 1:12 Though I have many things to write to you, I do not want to do so with paper and ink; but I hope to come to you and speak face to face, so that your joy may be made full.

Paul's joy towards the Philippians was only to be made complete - fulfilled - by them being united; the joy of the recipients of John's letter was to be made full - fulfilled - only by John visiting them in person. It's not that the joy of these two subjects was inexistent, that they didn't have joy, they did have it, but their joy would be only fulfilled by a last missing ingredient.

Therefore, if we are to accept the idea that the promise of Acts 13:33 is composed of multiple messianic promises of God in regard to Jesus' earthly course, mentioned in different prophecies, it is clear enough that when it is said about such a composite structure of elements that it is fulfilled, there's always one last event that fulfills it. In the case of this promise, it is the resurrection.

All promises fulfilled or a certain promise fulfilled?

What if the assumption that the promise of Acts 13:33 is composed of multiple messianic promises of God in regard to Jesus' earthly course, is an incorrect one? What if Paul refers to a certain promise? As an example here's what Matthew once said:

Matthew 12:16-21 and [Jesus] warned them not to tell who He was. This was to fulfill what was spoken through Isaiah the prophet: "Behold, My Servant whom I have chosen; My Beloved in whom My soul is well-pleased; I will put My Spirit upon Him, And He shall proclaim justice to the Gentiles. He will not quarrel, nor cry out; nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets [...] and in his name the gentiles will hope".

After Jesus heals a man in the synagogue, many follow him and they are healed too; they are warned by Jesus "not to tell who He was". And this warning is presented as the fulfillment of many messianic activities listed from verse 18 to 21. But this warning does not fulfill all those elements: it does not fulfill the identity of the one chosen by God to be the Messiah, nor God's soul being pleased with him, neither Him putting his spirit on Jesus, nor the proclaiming of justice to the gentiles, neither that in Jesus' name the gentiles will hope.

What this warning fulfills though is only a small part of these things: he will not cry out, nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets, in other words, he will not loudly advertise himself as the Messiah. Matthew doesn't in fact want to say that all those messianic activities were fulfilled with this occasion, but just a certain part of them. Is this also true in the case of what Paul says in Acts 13:33? Is Paul referring only to the promise of Messiah's resurrection?

First, let's acknowledge that Paul focuses on Jesus as being the Savior, and the salvation he brings:

Acts 13:23,26 "From the descendants of this man, according to promise, God has brought to Israel a Savior, Jesus, [...] Brethren, sons of Abraham's family, and those among you who fear God, to us the message of this salvation has been sent.

Then in the next verse Paul mentions that those who live in Jerusalem and their rulers fulfilled certain utterances of the prophets by condemning him to death. The next two verses say that in fact all that was written concerning Jesus was carried out by these people just before him being taken down from the cross, so this includes his death as well.

So Paul, after mentioning salvation, focuses on the prophecies that predicted the events surrounding his death: the disciples forsaking him, him being beaten and suffering, being put to death and despite that, living afterwards; Isaiah 53 records all this:

• Forsaken by his disciples: "He was despised and forsaken of men [...] All of us like sheep have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way; But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all To fall on Him." - vs. 3 and 6.
• Captured violently and condemned in a trial: "By oppression and judgment He was taken away" - vs. 8
• Suffered beatings: "The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, And by His scourging we are healed. [...] He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, so He did not open His mouth" - vs. 5,7
  
• Killed: "pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; [...] cut off out of the land of the living [...] the Lord was pleased To crush Him [...] He poured out Himself to death" - vs. 5,8,10,12
• After death, before resurrection: "His grave was assigned with wicked men, Yet He was with a rich man in His death [...] was numbered with the transgressors" - vs. 9,12
• Resurrected: "He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in His hand. [...] He will see it and be satisfied [...] I will allot Him a portion with the great, And He will divide the booty with the strong; Because He poured out Himself to death" - vs. 10-12.
  

Notice then how Paul is not focused specifically on Jesus' identity as the Messiah; he mentions no prophecies Jesus fulfilled during his ministry that would identify him as the Messiah, but only the ones (vs. 27,29) which have all strictly to do with events surrounding his death and his resurrection; then he goes on speaking of his death, resurrection and the effects of these (the salvation), spending a total of 13 verses on this focus (vs. 27-39).

So what does this prophecy of Isaiah have in common with the fact that Jesus is Savior, with the salvation mentioned previously? The same prophecy mentions this salvation:

He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities [...] The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, And by His scourging we are healed [...] the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all To fall on Him [...] He was cut off out of the land of the living for the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due [...] He rendered Himself as a guilt offering [...] My Servant, will justify the many, As He will bear their iniquities. [...] He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the transgressors" - vs 5,6,8,10-12

Compare these with these statements:

Jesus “released us from our sins by His blood” (Revelation 1:5). “In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses“.

This is the promise Paul is focused on, the salvation. Jesus' death and resurrection fulfilled this promise. As a conclusion to all this talk about his death and resurrection, Paul draws the final conclusion:

Acts 13:38-39 Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through Him forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you, and through Him everyone who believes is freed from all things, from which you could not be freed through the Law of Moses.

In other words, Paul's whole exposition served the role of proclaiming to these Jews the message of salvation from sin and death, the promise of this salvation proclaimed to the ancient Jews by Isaiah being fulfilled by the death and resurrection of Jesus.

According to this line of reasoning, 'You are my son; today I have begotten you" was fulfilled at resurrection, a conclusion strongly supported by the context this statement is found in. For how can this Psalm 2:7 be fulfilled at resurrection, please see Begetting at Resurrection.

Begetting at Resurrection?

The issue of Jesus' begetting is at the center of the preexistence controversy. When was Jesus begotten by God? Was this son of God begotten once or more than once, and what does that say about the idea that Jesus had a personal existence before he became human?

Unitarian unbelievers in Jesus' pre-human existence believe, as the Bible teaches, that those who died do not exist anymore. Death indeed interrupts someone's existence (as opposed to what mainstream Christendom believes), and resurrection then is the reversal of this state: those who died are being given life again, they are brought into existence.

The same Unitarians believe begetting is the process when a parent gives life to his offspring, brings it into existence. But for some reason, some of them do not believe what happens at resurrection is a begetting, despite the process being the same.

But when the only child of a parent dies, how many children does the parent have? Is the parent still a father to his dead son? Is the dead child still a son to his father? As in the case of humans, the relationship Father-Son ends because the relationship needs two entities. If one is missing, there's no relationship. That is why God can become again Jesus' Father at resurrection.

Here are some arguments in favor of the idea that resurrection from the dead is begetting.

Luke 20:36

Jesus was once asked by some Sadducees a question about the resurrection of the dead. When Jesus describes the resurrected ones, he says:

Luke 20:36 for they cannot even die anymore, because they are like angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.

Jesus says that being sons of the resurrection, those resurrected from the dead are sons of God. One of the reasons they are sons of God is because God, through Jesus, resurrected them, gave them life and brought them into existence once more.

Colossians 1:18

The apostle Paul himself says this about Jesus and his resurrection:

He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything.

Even in resurrection he has to be literally the first one. Yes, Jesus was the first one to be resurrected to eternal life. Thus, he is described by Paul as being the firstborn from the dead. In other words, he is God's first begotten from the dead, by way of resurrection to eternal life. Yes, God gave him life and brought him into existence by way of resurrection to eternal life, he was born from the dead.

Romans 1:4

Paul says something similar in his letter to the Romans:

who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord

The resurrection from the dead declared him to be the Son of God. But some argue that this verse must actually be understood as saying that God showed/proved that Jesus was his son by resurrecting him, the ultimate proof of Jesus being a son of Him, and not that Jesus became again a son to God because God gave him again life and brought him again into existence. Is that what Paul really wants to say?

When Paul says Jesus was "declared" son of God, he uses the Greek verb horizo (ὁρίζω in Greek). Note how this verb is translated in every instance it is used in the NT:

• Luke 22:22 "For indeed, the Son of Man is going as it has been determined; but woe to that man by whom He is betrayed!"
• Acts 2:23 "this Man, delivered over by the determined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.
• Acts 10:42 "And He ordered us to preach to the people, and solemnly to testify that this is the One who has been appointed by God as Judge of the living and the dead"
• Acts 11:29 "And in the proportion that any of the disciples had means, each of them determined to send a contribution for the relief of the brethren living in Judea.
• Acts 17:26 "and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation"
• Acts 17:31 "because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead"
• Hebrews 4:7 "He again fixes a certain day, "Today," saying through David after so long a time just as has been said before, "today if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts."

As it can be seen, this verb is frequently translated as "to determine", "to appoint" (when the above verses employ this verb with reference to Jesus as Judge, horizo is translated "to appoint". Would this mean that Jesus was appointed/determined to be God's son by the resurrection, in other words, by giving him life and bringing him into existence?

Please note that in a total of 37 English translations, this verb is rendered in these ways, by this many translations:

- declare: 15
- proved: 2
- established: 2
- designated: 3
- marked out: 3
- demonstrated: 1
- predestined: 1
- known: 3
- appointed: 3
- shown: 3
- before-ordained: 1

Here they are:

New American Standard Bible:
who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord,

New American Bible:
but established as Son of God in power according to the spirit of holiness through resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord.

New International Version:
and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.

Geneva Bible:
And declared mightily to be the Sonne of God, touching the Spirit of sanctification by the resurrection from the dead)

New Jerusalem Bible:
was born a descendant of David and who, in terms of the Spirit and of holiness, was designated Son of God in power by resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ, our Lord,

KJV:
And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

Revised Standard Version:
and designated Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord,

Complete Jewish Bible:
he was powerfully demonstrated to be Son of God spiritually, set apart by his having been resurrected from the dead; he is Yeshua the Messiah, our Lord.

God's Word translation
In his spiritual, holy nature he was declared the Son of God. This was shown in a powerful way when he came back to life.

American Standard Version:
who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead; even Jesus Christ our Lord,

Bible in Basic English:
But was marked out as Son of God in power by the Holy Spirit through the coming to life again of the dead; Jesus Christ our Lord,

Bishops' New Testament:
And hath ben declared to be the sonne of God, with power after the spirite that sanctifieth, by the resurrectio from the dead, of Iesus Christe our Lorde.

Holman Christian Standard Bible:
and was established as the powerful Son of God by the resurrection from the dead according to the Spirit of holiness.

Darby:
marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead) Jesus Christ our Lord;

Douay-Rheims American Edition:
Who was predestinated the Son of God in power, according to the spirit of sanctification, by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ from the dead;

English Revised Version:
who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection of the dead; even Jesus Christ our Lord,

English Standard Version:
and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord,

Etheridge Translation of the NT Peshitta:
and is known (to be) the Son of Aloha by power, and by the Holy Spirit, who raised him from among the dead, Jeshu Meshiha our Lord:

Magiera Peshitta NT Translation:
and was made known [as] the Son of God by power and by the Holy Spirit, who raised Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead,

Murdock Translation of the NT Peshitta:
and was made known as the Son of God, by power, and by the Holy Spirit,) who arose from the dead, Jesus Messiah, our Lord,

New English Translation:
who was appointed the Son-of-God-in-power according to the Holy Spirit by the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord.

New Living Translation:
and he was shown to be the Son of God when he was raised from the dead by the power of the Holy Spirit. He is Jesus Christ our Lord.

New Revised Standard Version:
and was declared to be Son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord,

Tyndale's New Testament:
and declared to be the sonne of God with power of the holy goost that sanctifieth sence the tyme that Iesus Christ oure Lorde rose agayne from deeth

Webster Bible:
And declared {to be} the Son of God, with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

Young's Literal Translation:
who is marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of sanctification, by the rising again from the dead,) Jesus Christ our Lord;

Weymouth New Testament:
but as regards the holiness of His Spirit was decisively proved by His Resurrection to be the Son of God--I mean concerning Jesus Christ our Lord,

World English Bible:
who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord,

International Standard Version:
and was declared by the resurrection from the dead to be the powerful Son of God according to the spirit of holiness-Jesus the Messiah, our Lord.

The Message:
his unique identity as Son of God was shown by the Spirit when Jesus was raised from the dead

Amplified Bible:
And according to the Spirit of holiness was openly designated the Son of God in power by His resurrection from the dead

Contemporary English Version:
But the Holy Spirit proved that Jesus is the powerful Son of God, because he was raised from death.

New Century Version:
But through the Spirit of holiness he was declared to be God's Son with great power by rising from the dead.

New International Reader's Version:
By the power of the Holy Spirit, he was appointed to be the mighty Son of God because he rose from the dead. He is Jesus Christ our Lord.

Wycliffe New Testament:
and he was before-ordained the Son of God in virtue, by the Spirit of hallowing of the again-rising of dead men, of Jesus Christ our Lord

Worldwide English (New Testament):
He came alive from death. That showed he was God's Son. He had God's power. God's Holy Spirit did all this.

Today's New International Version:
and who through the Spirit of holiness was appointed the Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.

Some translations which have footnotes for "declare/shown", want to make sure the reader does not miss out on other legitimate renderings of this verb:

NIV: "Or was appointed to be the Son of God with power"
KJV: declared: Gr. "determined"
NLT: "Or and was designated"

Notice how shown/known/proved/demonstrated constitute a minority of renderings, while declared/established/designated/appointed/ordained constitute a majority. There's a good explanation for this. None of the minority meanings are actual meanings of this verb. Here is what some lexicons have to say about the meanings of it:

• BDAG: to make a determination about an entity, determine, appoint, fix, set: of persons - appoint, designate, declare
• Friberg: of persons appoint, designate; as making a definite plan appoint, decide, determine;
• Barclay Newman: decide, determine; appoint, designate
• Louw-Nida: (figurative extension of meaning of ὁρίζω ‘to set limits on,’ not occurring in the NT) to come to a definite decision or firm resolve - ‘to decide, to determine, to resolve.’
• Lust-Eynikel-Hauspie: M: to establish, to ordain (an ordinance)
• Gingrich: determine, fix, set; appoint, designate, declare
• Thayer: to determine, appoint
• Liddell-Scottto mark out by boundaries; to limit, determine, appoint, lay down, order
• Strong: to mark off by boundaries, to determine;
  
  

The most basic meaning of this verb according to BDAG (the mother of all Greek-English lexicons) is "to separate entities and so establish a boundary". Other lexicons say the same thing, "mark off by boundaries". Entities are separated by being marked off with the help of boundaries, and so, the entities are defined. BDAG places the occurrence of this verb in Romans 1:4 under this main meaning:

"to make a determination about an entity, determine, appoint, fix, set"

But this meaning has two subsections:

a) of things
b) of persons

Naturally, Romans 1:4 is placed under b), because the verb's object here is a person, the Son of God. Now section b) is defined as:

b. of persons appoint, designate, declare.

Of course "declare" may have different shades of meaning. Which ones are we to consider for Rom 1:4? This lexicon is not merely saying that this verb also means "declare", but it specifies that this is a sub-meaning of "to make a determination about an entity, determine, appoint, fix, set".

One has to put the meaning "declare" in the context of "to make a determination about an entity, determine, appoint, fix, set". Those shades of meaning of "declare" are the valid ones, the ones that have an affinity for "making a determination about an entity, determine, appoint, fix, set". Most of the 15 translation committees that chose "declare" probably had in mind "to make a determination about an entity, determine, appoint, fix, set" when they chose to translate "declare".

Notice how the "declared" in the sense of "showing" Jesus to be a son of God, or "providing the decisive proof" that Jesus is a son of God, fits nowhere in this picture. These have nothing to do with "declare" in the sense of "to make a determination about an entity, determine, appoint, fix, set".

Also, the "appointed" rendering is used by three translations, while one more says in its footnote it can also be translated as "appointed", and another one's footnote says "designated"; two say "established", three more say "designated", fifteen more "declared".

There are good reasons then to conclude that Paul is saying here that Jesus was "appointed" by God to be his son through resurrection, by giving him life again and bringing him again into existence, and not that the resurrection was the ultimate proof of Jesus being a son of Him.

Being appointed to be the son of God is not a new idea. Psalm 2:7 already expressed the same idea.

Psalm 2:7

I will surely tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to Me, 'You are My Son, Today I have begotten You'

Notice how Messiah's status as a son is also the result of a decree. What does a decree do other than appoint/establish/designate/determine somebody to be something?

Is this verse referring to the birth of the son of God as a human? What does the context say?

Verses 1-3 say:

Why are the nations in an uproar And the peoples devising a vain thing? The kings of the earth take their stand And the rulers take counsel together Against the LORD and against His Anointed, saying, "Let us tear their fetters apart And cast away their cords from us!"

We know exactly when these first three verses, the beginning of this Psalm, were fulfilled; here's what 1st century Christian exegesis said:

Acts 4:24-28 And when they heard this, they lifted their voices to God with one accord and said, "O Lord, it is You who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that is in them, who by the Holy Spirit, through the mouth of our father David Your servant, said, 'why did the gentiles rage, and the peoples devise futile things? 'the kings of the earth took their stand, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord and against his Christ.' "For truly in this city there were gathered together against Your holy servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose predestined to occur.

These verses have their fulfillment, as these Christians said, when "in this city there were gathered together against Your holy servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose predestined to occur". That is, they are indicating the time when Jesus was arrested and put to death.

Then the psalm continues, showing what happens afterwards:

Psalm 2:4-6 He who sits in the heavens laughs, The Lord scoffs at them. Then He will speak to them in His anger And terrify them in His fury, saying, "But as for Me, I have installed My King Upon Zion, My holy mountain."

Notice how the events in this psalm are presented chronologically. First the rulers take their stand against Jesus, arresting him, torturing him and killing him. After that God laughs at them. and after that speaks to them in anger, saying He has installed his king, Jesus. Then Jesus cuts in, saying:

Psalm 2:7-8 "I will surely tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to Me, 'You are My Son, Today I have begotten You. 'Ask of Me, and I will surely give the nations as Your inheritance, And the very ends of the earth as Your possession.

So what is the context of verse 7?, the decree of God saying "You are my Son, today I have begotten you'? The death of Christ Jesus. It is also plain to see that the events presented in this psalm are succeeding chronologically, one after another, up until verse 7. What reason would be there to say that verse 7, the decree, does not also follow chronologically as well, after Jesus' death? No reason at all, especially since God tells Jesus in verse 8 that:

Ask of Me, and I will surely give the nations as Your inheritance, and the very ends of the earth as Your possession.

This verse is fulfilled chronologically, after Jesus death and after resurrection:

Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth".

Philippians 2:9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth

Acts 5:30-31 “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross. “He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

If verse 8 is fulfilled after the resurrection, and verse 7 after the death of Jesus, it is only natural to see that the decree of God that appoints Jesus as son again occurs between his death and after events following his resurrection; that is, the decree went out when the resurrection occurred, the act through which Jesus receives again life from his Father, when his Father brings him into existence again, making him His son again, saying to him:

Psalm 2:7 You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.

The context therefore leaves no room for the interpretation that Psalm 2:7 was actually fulfilled at Jesus' birth as a human. On the contrary, it points to Jesus becoming a son again to God at his resurrection from the dead, in harmony with what Paul said in Romans 1:4, that Jesus was appointed, by the decree of resurrection, to be God's son.

In conclusion, the Bible does indeed indicate that what happens at resurrection is begetting, life being given to creatures of God, bringing them into existence. The resurrected ones are sons of God because they are resurrected. Jesus is the first born of the dead by being resurrected to eternal life. Jesus is also appointed son of God by his resurrection. God tells him at his resurrection "You are my son, today I have begotten you'.