In my on-going study of textual critical issues, the following has been bothering me. The Critical Text (CT) has "only begotten God" while the Traditional Text (TR) has "only begotten Son" No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him. NASB No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known. ESV Note: Why does the ESV drop the word begotten? No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. KJV Now, I understand why the difference exists. The CT has the Greek word for God, not Son. The TR has the Greek word for Son. Aside from all the KJV/MVs debates, I would hope I am not the only one bothered by this. I am especially bothered by this becaue I have been taught that no important doctrine is affected by the textual variants. Well, this is clearly a textual variant. The CT has "God" and the TR has "Son" THey are different words. But does this difference constitute a substantial difference in theology? What does an "only begotten God" mean/imply? Is there an essential difference between reading this as the only begotten Son, or the only begotten God?