Many contemporary theologians I respect (e.g. Dr. Bruce Ware) do not see the eternal generation of the Son in Scripture nor do they see it necessary to preserve Trinitarian theology. This does not prove the eternal begetting of the Son false, but it should give us pause to think through the doctrine carefully. If one wishes to defend the eternal generation of the Son, I think one must clarify the eternal begetting of the Son from the Father. The begetting cannot be contingent on the Father, or else, I fear, we are left with some form of Arianism. Even if we construe it as contingent necessity, it is not necessity. The Father and Son must possess the same essential properties as God. So how, then, should we consider the eternal begetting? We have a choice: either discard the doctrine or revise the doctrine. If we revise the doctrine, I think, the eternal begetting can be understood as necessary. In other words, there can be no possible world which the Father does not beget the Son.
What are your thoughts?