Why is Jesus called son of God?

[rasifnajeeb]

Originally Posted by Marsh

they wanted to keep the point ambiguous. .

Originally Posted by Marsh

This ambiguity certainly accomplishes that goal.

You mean to say that God wanted to create doubts in the minds of people. But the Bible says "...God is not the author of confusion..." Corinthians 14:33

[JJM]

Originally Posted by rasifnajeeb

You mean to say that God wanted to create doubts in the minds of people. But the Bible says "...God is not the author of confusion..." Corinthians 14:33

Yeah Marsh I think you off on this one.





Anyway back to the original point about wither or not Jesus is only human. In Luke 10:18 Jesus claims to have seen Satan fall. The angels fell before humans were created so if Jesus was a mere human this would be impossible thus he must have more than just a human nature.

[JJM]

Originally Posted by BluejayWay

Interesting thread.

I've a question for the more theologically literate of you (which means all of you, I'm sure), which may have some bearing on the discussion.

I don't have a lot of time to post, so I can't research my question, but at several points in the Gospels, Jesus does refer to himself as the "son of man." What did he mean by this phrse, as opposed to the "Son of man"?

I don't know what the difference is when it comes to capitalization. "Son of man" is a title given to the messiah in Daniel. Can you give us an example of when it is capitalized and when it isn’t?

[BluejayWay]

Whoops--I foundered that post on a typo --should have read "...Son of man." What did he mean by this phrse, as opposed to the "Son of God"?My bad--

[Marsh]

Originally Posted by rasifnajeeb

You mean to say that God wanted to create doubts in the minds of people. But the Bible says "...God is not the author of confusion..." Corinthians 14:33

But that's just is: It isn't confusing for one who believes. The sheep know the voice of there shepherd: Jesus is my shepherd, and so I hear his voice. Other sheep do not hear it, and therefore do not understand it.

I think there is a difference between being ambiguous and being confusing. When Moses asked God who he was, God replied, "I am." That's pretty ambiguous, isn't it? But it isn't confusing because the point is not who God is in a technical sense, but who God is in a personal sense-- who he is and will be for Moses (a redeemer).

Jesus said that he is one with the Father. I don't know exactly what that means in a technical sense, but I can understand what it implies: When Jesus promises something, he means it, and will deliver. That's good enough for me.

[FriendRob]

Originally Posted by Marsh

Jesus said that he is one with the Father.

But even this doesn't really answer the question.

Originally Posted by John 17:20-21

"I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us

So beleivers are (or will be) "in" God, in the same way that Jesus is "in" God.

Originally Posted by BluejayWay

What did he mean by this phrse, as opposed to the "Son of God"?

This phrase is a reference to the vision of Ezekiel (Ez 1:26) In modern translations, the term is usually translated "one in human form" or something like that. Originally, that's all that "son of man" meant: a human being. Around the time of Jesus, there was a lot of interest in, and speculation about, visions like that of Ezekiel and what they might mean. Other Jewish writings of the time also use "son of man" to refer to an exalted being, sometimes sitting on a throne. The books of Enoch, for example. Interestingly, the book of Jude in the NT quotes from Enoch (Jude1:14-15).

As has been mentioned already, "son of God" could be used for a king of Israel, or for the Jewish people as a whole. We could sum it up by saying:

"son of God" = chosen one
"son of man" = exalted one

In Christianity, of course, both of these terms, as well as others like Lord and Christ (Greek for Messiah = "anointed one") and Logos (=Word, reason) came to be terms for Jesus.

If you put the NT books into chronological order, you can see some of the development of ideas about Jesus.

(Hypothetical) Q document: Doesn't use any of these terms, seems to consider Jesus as a human teacher.

Paul: Jesus is Lord and Christ. The Messiah was not necessarily a heavenly being, rather it was expected that a human, a descendant of David, would arise and become King. "Lord", too, could refer to a human in authority, even as in English (e.g. House of Lords in British Parliament).

Mark (earliest gospel): Jesus is called Christ only in a few places. Mostly, Mark uses "son of man".

Luke and Matthew: Jesus gains a miraculous birth and appears after his death in exalted form.

John: Jesus is now "one with God" and has become the medium of salvation and a pre-existent being.

[Abogado del Diablo]

Originally Posted by FriendRob

So beleivers are (or will be) "in" God, in the same way that Jesus is "in" God.

In "The Gnostic Gospels", Elaine Pagels remarks on a similar view of Jesus embodied in Gnosticism:

"Instead of coming to save us from sin, [Jesus] comes as a guide who opens access to spiritual understanding. But when the disciple attains enlightenment, Jesus no longer serves as his spiritual master: the two have become equal -- even identical"

Thus, you see the following in the Gospel of Thomas:

"He who will drink from my mouth will become as I am: I myself shall become he, and the things that are hidden will be revealed to him."

and

When you know yourselves, then you will be known, and you will understand that you are children of the living Father. But if you do not know yourselves, then you live in poverty, and you are the poverty."


Jesus said, "The person old in days won't hesitate to ask a little child seven days old about the place of life, and that person will live. For many of the first will be last, and will become a single one."

and

And he said, "The person is like a wise fisherman who cast his net into the sea and drew it up from the sea full of little fish. Among them the wise fisherman discovered a fine large fish. He threw all the little fish back into the sea, and easily chose the large fish. Anyone here with two good ears had better listen!"

and

Jesus said to them, "When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the kingdom]."

[Sacredstar]

Dear Abogado

I love these quotes thank you for posting them together.

I read somewhere that in the Gospel of Thomas there are more mention of the words happy and happiness then any other gospel.

Sacredstar

[Sacredstar]

My understanding of this statement is thus

Jesus said to them, "When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner,

and the upper like the lower,

(Higher consciousness and lower consciousness aligned)

and when you make male and female into a single one,

(male and female energies aligned)

so that the male will not be male nor the female be female.

(Oneness is then achieved)

Interesting today I also found a Hebrew quote which is saying the same to me.

In Hebrew "truth" and "faith" are both from the same root. In Kabbalah, they correspond to the perfected "male" and "feminine" states of reality which when consummately united bring redemption to the world.


being love

Sacredstar

[mirrorinthefog]

I've admittedly never read the Bible (ehe ), but, from what I understand of Christianity (and I could be hopelessly lost on this point), Jesus is seen as the embodiment of the Divine, and the symbol of the relationship between God and man. The crucifixion is thus seen as a symbol of God's mercy and forgiveness.
Whether or not one chooses to believe that he was literally God's son or not is up to the individual, and to his religion. Personally, I don't think one person being wrong makes the other right, two viewpoints can be equally wrong or equally right; there's not always one concrete explanation for everything.

[Ratanya]

I will be the first to admit that I have often found the Bible confusing. It is because of this confusion that I always now read the bible in thier individual books, looking at their context to timeline etc.. and try not to reference one book against another unless within that book it specifically asks for me to do so.

In Jude for example, Jesus quotes from the 'Book of Righteouness' (Enoch). I always thought it odd for this reason that this book was not included within the bible.

In relation to this topic however.. The piece of scripture from John 10 below is one of my favorites. Jesus is challenged by the Jews and he answers them.

22 And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter. 23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch. 24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.

25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. 26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. 30 I and my Father are one.

31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? 33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? 37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him. 3

[Sacredstar]

Dear Ratanya

Yes I love that quote too, welcome to the forum.

And this is a good quote to follow it with I feel.

"For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will dwell in them And walk among them. I will be their God, And they shall be My people." (2 Corinthians 6:16)"

Love beyond measure

Sacredstar

[Ratanya]

Thank you, Sacred Star