Alan,

I have known a number of people, in the different churches that I was part of, that believed Proverbs 8:22-31 to be teaching exactly as you presented.

And these were Bible believing churches, where most studied the scriptures for themselves, in addition to their daily reading.

Another thing that came to the fore in churches I was part of were teachings on three different views at the council of Nicaea.

1. The arians believed that the Son is of a "different essence" than the Father, and that the Son was the first creation of the Father   -   hetero-ousios (of a different substance)

2. The semi-arians believed that the Son is of a "similar essence" to the Father, and that the Father begat the Son in eternity past     -   homoi-ousios (of a similar substance)

3. Athanasius believed that the Son is of the "same essence" of the Father, eternally begotten of the eternally unbegotten Father      -   homo-ousios (of the same substance)

For the third group, eternally begotten designated the "uniqueness of", or "one of a kind", relationship between the Father and the Son.

The semi-arians were concerned that what Athanasius presented sounded too Sabellian (Oneness).

The orthodox view over the past 1700 years aligns with what Athanasius presented, yet there remained a significant semi-arian view, with some, over the centuries.

It would seem that there has been a modern resurgence of this view, like there has also been a resurgence of the Sabellian view.

Both the orthodox view and the semi-arian view both reject the arian view, as a denial of the deity of Christ, like seen in its resurgence with the jehovah witnesses.

So that, today, there can be some people in the same church, holding to the orthodox view, while simultaneously some also holding to the semi-arian view.

The difference, sometimes without realizing the full ramifications, comes down to: "begotten in eternity past", vs. "eternally begotten".

The semi-arian view considers the phrase, "this day have I begotten thee", to be proof that the Son was begotten in eternity past.

However, that wording shows up in four different places in the scriptures, where each context is different:

Psalm 2:7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

This day - The context of Psalm 2 is the second advent of Jesus after the tribulation.

 

Acts 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

This day - The context of Acts 13:33 is the resurrection of Jesus.

 

Hebrews 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

This day - The context of Hebrews 1:5, with Hebrews 1:3, two lines earlier, is the ascension of Jesus into glory, to the throne.

 

Hebrews 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.

To day: instead of “this day” it says “to day”, instead of a specific day, it’s continuous, in the present, “to day”

The context is the high priestly role of Jesus, which he continuously carries out, as he intercedes for us before the Father.

So which day is it? the day he comes back? the day he rose from the dead? the day he ascended? or everyday he intercedes?

So, what does only begotten mean? How is the Son begotten of the Father?

When a father begets a son, he is transferring, or communicating, his nature to his son, that’s why sons are like their fathers:

 

Genesis 5:3  And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

 

But the Son of God shares the same nature as the Father, the same essence as the Father.

 

John 14:9c  he that hath seen me hath seen the Father;

So which day is it? the day he comes back? the day he rose from the dead? the day he ascended? or everyday he intercedes?

Not begat (past tense), nor begetting (present tense), nor will beget (future tense), nor continually begetting (but never complete), nor "had begotten" (past perfect tense - completed at some point in the past), nor "will have begotten" (future perfect tense - to be completed at some point in the future) - but rather: "have begotten" (present perfect tense - complete at this present moment).

The LORD is not in time, but eternal. Present perfect is the only way to describe it. God never "had" a past, man has a past. God always "is" right now in the past, and right now in the future. Whenever anyone considered, they would have to say that the Son "has been begotten". In eternity, or throughout time, the Son always has been communicated all the nature of the Father. Not a process where the Son becomes more and more like the Father, but eternally and always a nature from the Father to the Son. Not something that was started, and not finished yet, but something that eternally always has been. The begetting of the Son needs to be understood from eternity’s perspective, not from a point in time, because God is immutable, God doesn’t change.

In present perfect, it means that it is always true that he is the only begotten Son of God.

In the present perfect, it means that it was ‘never not true’.

On ‘any day’, or for ‘every day’, it is true that, “this day have I begotten thee”, because at any time, it is already so.

It has always been true that the Father has fully communicated all of his nature to the Son, it was never not true.

There never was a “before”; in other words, there never was a time when the Son had not been begotten yet.

Hence, begotten is always true, the Son always was and always will be begotten.

Therefore, Jesus is truly, and uniquely, the only begotten Son of God.

The doctrine of eternal Sonship holds that this "generation", i.e. the begetting, of the Son, is an eternal state in the Godhead.

So, eternally begotten means, always was and always will be, a state of the Father having begotten the Son. 

In this sense, the Father can say of any day, “this day have I begotten thee”.

Therefore, if "begotten in eternity past", is held to, rather than, "eternally begotten", it leads to a couple of different conclusions.

One is that it possibly suggests that the Father brought forth a baby God, back in eternity past.

Which would tie-in with the semi-arian view of Proverbs 8, where:

Proverbs 8:23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.

  24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.

  25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:

However, it would then seem to suggest that the Son, aged, or grew up, way back then:

Proverbs 8:30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;

This view is more common than most people realize, as evidenced by paintings over the centuries.

Where the Father is portrayed as much older, with white hair and a white beard, but the Son as younger, still with dark hair and a dark beard.

That is because, unconsciously, the Father is considered "older" than the Son, at least by those with a semi-arian view.

However, if the Father brought forth a baby God, then he clearly wasn't the Father until he brought forth the baby God.

That would mean there wasn't an everlasting Father nor an everlasting Son, as bringing forth a baby God would imply the Father changed, and definitely the Son changed:

Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

 

Hebrews 6:17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath:

 

Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

However, the semi-arian view of Proverbs 8 would indicate that the Father created, after he brought forth the baby Son, rather than the Son creating.

Which apparently was a compromise with the orthodox view, in the creed, and then ending up eventually in the apostles creed, so that the two views defeated the arians at the council.

"I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth."

Whereas the scriptures show that the Father created "by the Son", i.e. that the Son did the creating:

Ephesians 3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

Hebrews 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

Hebrews 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

  10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:

Colossians 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

  16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

  2 The same was in the beginning with God.

  3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Additionally, the semi-arian view considers that wisdom, as seen in Proverbs 8, is a personification, talking about the Son.

However, a few lines earlier, in the same chapter 8, wisdom is spoken of as a "she", rather than a "he" (i.e. the Son):

Proverbs 8:1a Doth not wisdom cry?

  2 She standeth in the top of high places, by the way in the places of the paths.

  3 She crieth at the gates, at the entry of the city, at the coming in at the doors.

As also in both the preceding chapter and the succeeding chapter:

Proverbs 7:4a Say unto wisdom, Thou art my sister;

Proverbs 9:1 Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars:

  2 She hath killed her beasts; she hath mingled her wine; she hath also furnished her table.

  3 She hath sent forth her maidens: she crieth upon the highest places of the city,

Additionally, if wisdom in Proverbs 8 is to be taken as the Son:

Proverbs 8:12 I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions.

Then who is prudence? His sister? No, there is no daughter of God, coequal with the Father and the Holy Ghost, only the Son.

All that being said, I have good friends, and brothers in Christ, who believe the semi-arian view, who preach the same gospel, and go to the same church.

To some that may seem too heretical to be true from both sides.

In a similar way, in one family, where one brother is a Pentecostal, and the other a Baptist, but the moment their mother falls ill, they both drop to their knees and pray for her, together.

To some, that also may seem too heretical.

So also, that some semi-arians may consider other semi-arians as heretical having any fellowship with those they still consider too Sabellian, holding the orthodox view.

What I can suggest are the following:

I John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

Romans 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

.