The Eternally Begotten Son
I have encountered some interesting discussion lately regarding the function of the three persons of the Trinity. One discussion specifically wondered if we can speak meaningfully of the roles of those persons in eternity past. Namely, could any one of the three have become the Son? Some have suggested the answer to this must be affirmative. The three persons, although eternally existent, were NOT eternal occupants of the roles we see revealed in scripture.
I wonder how well this fits with the Nicene Creed. The Creed states (see http://www.creeds.net/ancient/niceneg.htm for the full text of the creed):
Και εις ένα κύριον Ιησουν Χριστον, τον υιον του θεου τον μονογενη, τον ει του πατρος γεννηθέν τα προ πάντων των αιώνων, φως εκ φωτος, θεον αληθινον εκ θεου αληθινου, γεννηθέντα, ου ποιηθέντα, ομοουσιον τωι πατρί
[We believe] in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father.
Question: Can the creed be read in such a way that the second person of the trinity was, at some point in eternity past, NOT the Son? Or does the creedal depiction of “begottenness” speak more of relationship rather than event?