- This topic has 151 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
What are the differences between the terms son of God and son of man?
The speaker in the video below gives a good answer for this, but unfortunately appears to also support the Trinity Doctrine. Why is it that Trinitarians put ‘son of God’ and ‘God’ in same sentence? Why do Christians teach the Trinity when it only offends Muslims and others and never converts them? In scripture it is clear that we are told to spread the teachings of Jesus and he never said he was God. He claimed to be the son of God, the messiah, and we know he is the Lord. If Muslims are offended that we say Jesus is the son of God, then let them be offended. If they are offended because we say that Jesus is God, then that is a shame to us because we lay a stumbling block for them. If you believe and follow Jesus Christ, then keep it real. What is required of us to believe and teach when it comes to who Jesus is? The three scriptures below give us that answer.
Matthew 16:13-16
13 When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”
14 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”
15 “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”
16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”Philippians 2:10-11
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.Acts 2:36
“Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah.”Main Problem of a Muslim solved by Ex Muslim
I watched the video and have my doubts as to whether the muslim’s main problem was solved by the ex-muslim but the explanation is interesting. And the term “son of God” as it’s applied to Jesus in the NT does invoke divinity in some form.Even if Jesus didn’t become the son of God until he was resurrected and ascended that still puts him in a divine state at God’s right hand in heaven and if we are to bow and worship him then that’s more than just honor to an earthly king. And the quote from Paul that every knee should bow and confess is worded from Isaiah in which it’s claimed for Jehovah only.
And in Mark’s version of Peter’s confession he only says”thou art the Christ”-which Muslims believe about Jesus,but Matthew adds “son of the living God”. If we are all by nature or by faith sons of the living God then why is this any special title? And Jesus even tells them not to tell anybody until after the resurrection so it’s doubtful if he ever made public claims about it.
So was Jesus only claiming to be the”son of man”,but this had a supernatural connotation, but doesn’t necessarily mean son of God too?
It’s understandable that when we say Jesus is the son of God,Muslims automatically assume we are saying he’s therefore God too since that is what Mohamed spoke against and what most Christians believe.And apparently some Muslims are still converted anyway.
Nice topic, thanks for sharing!
As the Son of God, I’m seated at the right hand of our Heavenly Father & as the Son of Man, I govern the Universe for all eternity! Alleluia! Amen! <3 🙂 * (Y)
I agree that the answer didn’t satisfy, but more likely stumped him momentarily. The muslim’s problem with the logic of the Trinity or lack thereof still stands though.
“As the Son of God, I’m seated at the right hand of our Heavenly Father & as the Son of Man, I govern the Universe for all eternity! Alleluia! Amen! <3 🙂 * “(Y)
So as the Son of God and Son of Man are you also God?
Your son is not you. Your brother’s son is not your brother. Nor is God’s son, God.
Son of God is all you need to say to understand that Jesus is not God. It really is as simple as it comes across. It was never meant to be complicated. Was never meant to be Greek philosophy. Just simplicity in Christ. The term ‘son of God’ means what it says. It is also absolute that we believe this truth. If we do not believe that he is the son of God even though it says so, if we make it out to mean something else, then that is surely a denial.
If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in them and they in God.
Jesus is the son of the living God, the messiah, and the one whom God made Lord. He is the prototype son in whom many will gain sonship.
Guys, wrongful perspective will never gain you the insight you are seeking.
‘Son of God’ is in no way referring to a ‘PROCREATION’ from God.
You MUST UNDERSTAND the definitions of the terms you are using in order to arrive at your goal.
The TITLE of ‘GOD’ is NOT A PERSON….!!!
‘God’ is a term …..a TITLE … OF A PERSON (properly, an ENTITY) that is THE SUPREME (Being) in its respective CLASS…
ANYONE, EVERYONE, who is SUPREME in ANY respective CLASS is ‘GOD’ of that respective CLASS.
Now, BECAUSE we are speaking of Christian Religious CLASS, we give that TITLE to our ONE AND ONLY SUPREME ‘DEITY’. That deity gave us (his) personal NAME of ‘YHWH’ (Hebrew for ‘I AM’… Note the capitals – more on this later) which we must respect despite our inability to pronounce it (There is no excuse for TRYING – Yahweh, or Jehovah is way good enough…afterall, ‘Jesus’ is not the name of the Christ of Yahweh… It is in fact, ‘JOSHUA’ (Jew-English) or ‘Yeshua'(Hebrew).. But no one seems ‘mispronouncing’ the name of the christ is disrespectful!)
People, didn’t the Egyptians have ‘Gods’… Don’t Hindus have ‘Gods’, and the Philistines, and … Well, EVERY RELIGION has one (but normally more of’ ‘GOD’.. Why? Because it is THEIR SUPREME DEITY.
The Greeks, as you all know, had miriad GODS… now PLEASE DO NOT start telling me about ‘They were all FALSE GODS’… No no no… To YOU they were false gods… To them the Christian God was also FALSE!!! Don’t judge them – the point IS that they also used the TITLE ‘God’ for their deities.
Note that ‘God’ is actually a foreshortened term. It is properly ‘THE GOD’… A name does not properly carry a definite clause (‘The’) – improper usage of language (particularly ultra flexible English) has led to open and misusage here. Who says, ‘King sent me… President told me… Queen entertained her guests…!’?
My point is that you must not think of ‘GOD’ as a NAME but as a TITLE of a Person. It is no different a title except n importance to ‘King’ or ‘Majesty’ or ‘President’.
Now, on the topic: ‘Son’ in respect of the TITLE ‘Son of (the) God’ does not mean an PROCREATED offspring as I said before. It means ‘One who fully does the works of him who gave him the works. One who fully follows the ways of him’. Jesus says so in response to the Jews who accused him of claiming to be ‘GOD’.
Jesus said, ‘I did not say I was GOD, but ONLY the Son of God… He himself called them (men of renown: the holy men and prophets) who received and ACTED ON the word of God, ‘GODS’….’
And next cones the crucial part in regard to the topic: ‘I am doing the works of my Father’.
This is the definition of ‘Son’ … Definition of TRUE SON!!!
Even a (HUMAN) PROCREATED Son is NOT A SON IF he does not follow his Father… ‘You have done wrong: You are no Son of mine – you are not doing what, I as your Father, would do!’
Even scriptures later states, ‘Everyone who follows the Holy Spirit (of God) is a Son of God’
Jesus dismisses (a set of) the Jews saying, ‘Yourfather is Satan’… Where these really PROCREATED by Satan? Or does it mean the SAME CONTEXT of ‘They followed the ways of Satan – they do the works of Satan…’?
‘Procreated’? The one God:Yahweh, and Satan, are SPIRITS… A Spirit DOES NOT PROCREATE….!!!
Ok, so now we know that ‘THE Son of THE (one true) God: ‘Yhwh’, of the Jews/Christians), Jesus, THE Christ (see the TITLES and the one names) is ‘Son’ because he and he alone fully followed ‘HIS God’.
And, of course, you know that ADAM, the first human person, was ALSO ‘THE SON OF THE … GOD’ from the day of his CREATION…. until the his fall into sin.
Adam followed his God and creator until he was tempted away by self weakness.
Adam, was not a ‘Son of man’… He was ‘THE FATHER’ IN humanity. Our God gave Adam the ability to procreate offsprings… Like for like… God ‘Created’ in his image but encased the spirit in a physically limited flesh body so it would remain within the bounds of the limited physical world he put us in. He restricted the SPIRIT of man so that it cannot function without the body of that person : without the spirit actively in the body, that body (or the person in whole) is called ‘DEAD’.
Jesus is ‘A SON of MAN(KIND)’… Note the extended term!!
In this, Jesus acknowledges that he is BOUND to humanity – he is A HUMAN PERSON. He eats, sleeps, feels pain, ..etc etc … He can die…!!!
Son of God is a spiritual term denoting the person as a fully paid up follower of the God of his belief.
The Egyptians before Christianity, believed that many of them were ‘Sons of the gods’. Greeks had (mythologies) where the gods PROCREATED sons (and daughters?) as humans…
Virtually all Christians ‘poo-poo’ such ideas YET MOST STRONGLY believe that Jesus the Christ IS A PROCREATED GOD…. While…at the same time claiming that that Jesus IS THAT SAME GOD that PROCREATED HIM!! And then DENYING the selfsame claim saying that ‘THE GOD’ they believe in is IN FACT AN “ESSENCE” and A ‘NATURE’.
So unpick this:
1) ‘The deity of the Jews’, ‘The God’, is a person
2) That God is primarily in scriptures, The Father
3) The father ‘created/procreated’ a son… who IS THE GOD… The SAME GOD who ….!!!!
4) But the God is NOT A PERSON but rather just an Essence and Nature of which the father and son SHARE!!
5) The Son is FULLY (the God) he came from: remember that ‘God’ is Father and Son – So… The son MYST ALSO BE …not only himself…,but ALSO THE Father…
6) Follow the false logic above by replacing ‘God’ with ‘President’, or ‘King’ or ‘Queen’… (Oops, TRY TO FOLLOW…!)
Guys, simple things: ‘Son of THE God’ just means ‘One who follows and does the things of God’.
Guys, simple things: ‘Son of manKIND) just means ‘One who follows and does the things of mankind’
Oh, before you jump all over me… ‘Things of mankind’ means ‘sinless man’ – as in the day of Adams creation. Remember that Jesus was not born in sin nor did he draw sin into himself. Jesus tried to SHOW the Jews how to live as a TRULY SINLESS AND HOLY MAN.
Jael,
The term Son of Man in the gospels is not referring to just being a human,it’s referring to the eschatological figure in Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
And how can you say God did not procreate Jesus when he was born of a virgin?Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
The reason he shall be called the Son of God according to this verse is because of the Holy Ghost coming upon her,not because he’s paid his dues to God.
Dear dear dear Andrew, I realise that you can’t read and understand spiritual things too well, so I will take this to mind in what you just said.
You fail to understand the connection between the Holy Spirit infusing the egg of Mary to enliven it as a SINLESS AND HOLY child, with, the breath of God (Holy spirit) infusing and enlivening the lifeless body of Adam to make him a living soul. Adam, like Jesus, was sinless and holy in the day of his creation.
Mary did not PROCREATE Jesus – God CREATED him. Her genes were not in Jesus – if Jesus was bitten by a snake he would not have gotten sick or died. Jesus told the apostles that when the Holy Spirit came upon them they (too) would pick up snakes and shake them off without hurt.
Although everyone regarded Jesus as ‘The Son of Mary’, Jesus himself was disdaining at the extreme (but compliant with her in childhood). Witness his dismissal of her affrontery in demanding he ‘perform’ at the wedding ceremony in Cana, ‘WOMAN, what has this to do with me?!’. Mary was overdesperate to SHOW OFF that which God had created from her egg.
By the way, there is no such thing as a ‘holy GHOST’. In using such arcane description you show you are inflicted by wrongful tradition. A ‘Ghost’ implies a bodiless apparition – typically of a dead human being. This is not only complete illogical but also totally false – a result of middle ages mindset and a night in a frosty marsh creaky wooden buildings…and an over fertile mind.
Andrew, you seem to be seeking – but in seeking you need to be mindful of legacy failings in your learning.
Andrew, read Romans 8:14 and 1 John 3:10, and John 5:19. All these and more testify to ‘Who is a son of God’.
Don’t stress over ‘Son of God’ and ‘A Son of God’. Jesus was the ONLY PERSON who ‘did NOT DO OF HIS OWN WILL BUT ONLY what he saw the Father do’… This rightly makes him ‘THE son of God’ – only ONE… But later there would be MORE so then you cannot say only ‘The Son’ but must say ‘one of many’ – and individually, ‘A SON OF GOD’.
Dear Jael,
How do you not understand either of the scriptures I quoted to you? You respond to neither but only give even more far out theories.
So by saying Jesus was created by God and not procreated through Mary,you remove him entirely from the Adamic race.So just as Adam wasn’t a son of man,neither was Jesus. If no part of even Mary’s genes were in Jesus then he has no human ancestry whatsoever. If that be the case then he was in no way the physical seed of Abraham,let alone of David,but only the seed of God. So Jesus would be the one and only of his species of man? Actually this idea might fit with John’s gospel by making him quite an unearthly being-a God, who came down from heaven,yet is in heaven seeing and doing only what he sees his Father God doing.
I find it odd that you think John is trinitarian addition yet it seems to be a mainstay of your theology as you cite it so often. Do you notice how in John 1 Jesus genealogy is only God yet later he has a mother,with no birth story included? And you mention how Jesus treats his mother with disdain,yet he still does what she wanted right after that so he being other worldly and above her might be the point of this detail. Yet we read in Mark 3 which has no virgin birth story that his family thinks he’s lost his mind after he starts his ministry and he says “who is my mother or my brethren?” so apparently even his mother didn’t believe in him and this saying is repeated in Matt and Lk without the “he’s beside himself/out of his mind”. So in John Mary is trying to”show off” her son as you say yet in the other gospels she doesn’t even believe in/follow him at the start of his ministry and according to John 2 this was the first of his miracles or signs in which he manifested “his glory”.
And you make reference to picking up snakes in Mk 16 and that is the most well known and proven later addition in all the NT,more so than 1John 5:7. You say on the one hand Jesus was human,” He eats, sleeps, feels pain, ..etc etc … He can die…!!!” yet he could be bitten by snakes without getting hurt or sick or die and that due not to having the Holy Spirit,but to not having any human genes?
Oh wow, Andrew…. You really pulled out all the stops on that misreading.
First off: Jesus’ ancestry is ACCORDING TO the family line as seen from the Jewish perspective. Jews (like hobbits of LOTR) put a lot of store by knowing their lineage… So since THEY knew nothing of Jesus’ CREATION in the manner of the first man, Adam, it is no surprise that the genealogy is in the lineage as stated (Either books suffice despite the slight but explainable differences). I think you are barking up the wrong tree on that one.
Jesus is THE SECOND (and LAST) ADAM… You seem to not understand what the Jewish word ‘ADAM’ means…
Can you remind me…: WHERE DID YOU STUDY SCRIPTURES??? Didn’t anyone explain BASIC little things like that to you???
Andrew…Paul was bitten by a snake and just shook it off into a fire… The local people standing by were amazed that he didn’t die… Are you saying Paul wasn’t a man, a human being? No, Andrew, I heard even today of a living man who can be bitten by snakes and live. He has been injecting himself with minute amounts of venom for years and is now immune. YES Andrew, Jesus told the apostles that THAT WOULD HAPPEN… It has NOTHING TO DO WITH BEING OR NOT BEING HUMAN. It has to do with INCREASING KNOWKEDGE OF BIOLOGY, CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS… Many of which first century man knew nothing about…. For that time EVERYTHING we can do today would have been possible to them BY FAITH ALONE…..! I don’t think you understand such things though!
Jael,
Jewish ancestry is through paternal lineage and just who knew nothing of Jesus creation in the manner of the first man Adam? are you referring to the authors of Matthew and Luke? Is John’s genealogy more correct then, just Father and Son? You know if Jesus was virgin born he had no human paternal lineage anyway. And yes I know Adam means man,but you’re saying Jesus has no Adamic lineage even through Mary.The Catholics have done the same to protect the divinity and sinlessness of Christ by coming up with the Immaculate Conception of Mary so that she too was free from original sin.
Can you tell me what cult you study the bible with? and weren’t we talking about faith and scripture not modern injections?
Dear Andrew, you really should study more before you raise debate points.
Two authors outline Jesus’ lineage AS THEY SAW IT.
One goes down the Paternal lineage of Joseph(the SUPPOSED human FATHER) and the otherwise through Mary (Maternal). Mary’s lineage dovetails with Joseph’s before it reaches David, therefore NO SCRIPTURE PROPHECY is broken.
Andrew, do you actually STUDY the scriptures?
I warrant that you are SO CONFUSED from all the lamentable false teachings you have been through that nothing really makes any sense to you anymore-
You are seeking but not looking for the truth.
You are trying to find away to merge your false ideology with RANDOMLY SELECTED things you findin the scriptures.
Let me point you in the right direction… TOWARD THE SPIRITUAL:
Jesud is ‘Of Heaven (Spiritual realm)’ – the Jews are ‘Of the earth’ (Physical realm).
This is not saying Jesus is ‘GOD’ as trinitarians and their ilk try to put it… It is saying Jesus speaks and refers ALWAYS OF AND ALWAYS TOWARD THE SPIRITUAL – You wrote yourself that Jesus said to them, ‘Why do you not understand my words?’
Jesus was TAUGHT by God… Jesus LEARNED obedience (Yes, to Mary and Joseph AND) to his fellow MAN, in daily life and spiritual aspects DESPITE knowing that many ways of the Jews were STRANGLING and DISENFRANCHISING them from their ONE TRUE GOD, Yahweh.
Andrew, when was the FIRST ENCOUNTER of Jesus breaking the Mosaic law (Oh dear, do I really have to teach you the ‘why’s and wayforth’s about this AS WELL?!).
Was Jesus a child or an ADULT; before or AFTER he was baptised and ANOINTED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT and tested in the wilderness? (P.s. Andrew, what is the purpose of Jesus’ anointment – what does it mean?)
Mary did not PROCREATE Jesus – God CREATED him. Her genes were not in Jesus
Hi Jael,
Are you suggesting that (Jesus’ mother) Mary was merely (according to you) a surrogate mother?
____________
God bless
Ed JHello Edj… It is a dangerous road to go down if it is to be suggested that Jesus’ birth was through natural means in terms of human procreation. This would lead to the ‘veneration and worship of Mary’ that many Protestant and others are fond of claiming – despite absolutely no evidence from scriptures (nor any verifiable source or anywhere else, come to think of it!)
God CREATED in Mary a holy and sinless human being. This is NOT PROCREATION.
OF COURSE Mary would always be CALLED ‘The Mother of Jesus’ because every human birth is attributed to (the mother) – and MORE IMPORTANTLY – to a Father : Naturally and for tradition and heritage sake no one was going to claim GOD as the Father but God instructed Joseph that he should (shake off his doubts, anger and fears and ) continue with Mary as his betrothed and go along with the assumption that the child was his (The pitiless gossip would soon die away!!)
Edj, please do not enter into specifics of fleshly aspects of things in scriptures. God can do anything to his creation (but doesn’t). 1) Remember Moses… God made his hand wither and then restored it whole both in a moment. 2) Scriptures tells that God can create hunans from bare stones. 3) God says, ‘Who made the blind, who made the deaf… I did!’.
Edj, God created the first man (Adam) – God CREATED a second man (Jesus). ALL OTHERS of mankind were PROCREATED from the FATHERS SEED (sperm). It is the human sperm that carries the SPIRIT that causes the HUMAN PROCREATION. The HOLY SPIRIT was that spirit in BOTH ADAM AND JESUS.
No Jael I’m not confused but grant that you are by all the cultic teaching you’re currently under.I grant I was at one time confused and under cultic teachings also but T8 and others helped me to read the scriptures for myself. I don’t think you’re teaching me anything except to be more thankful that I’m no longer under an arrogant and ignorant spell.
And just where is Mary’s lineage in the scripture? There is no documentation for that,but trins and JiG’s say the same thing as you. Both ancestral lists are through Joseph and you rightly say AS THEY SAW IT. And if Jesus be virgin born the genealogies are really pointless anyway and maybe that’s why John just has God,and the Word who was with God and was God and became flesh,and also it’s written somewhere to give no heed to fables and endless genealogies which minister questions.
- Dear Andrew,
I observe from your confession that you are appear to be claiming that you now believe the truth about God and Christ.
Well, that is a great aspiration – if indeed the truth is what you have found where you are looking.
In that vein I hope to see solid scriptural cohesion in your expositions from Here on in.
As for the lineage of Jesus, research shows that there is too much controversy for lay persons such as you and I to bring a veritable conclusion.
Suffice it to say each intersects to confirm the scriptural prophecy that the Christ would come from the lineage of David.
This then confirms that the Christ is truly a son of man and not some ethereal ‘God in flesh’.
Indeed, what does ‘God’ mean? Trini’s and Jig’s seem completely at odds with each other and themselves with this word or term.
In one instance ‘God’ is three persons…Father, Son (notice that no one says ‘Jesus’ here!), and Holy Spirit (notice that scriptures describes this as a ‘Wind’, or ‘Breathe’ but trini’s call it a PERSON’!!!)
In another, ‘God’ is a person it-/himself…
And yet further, ‘God’ is ****’THE FATHER ALONE’**** as distinct from HIS SON and HIS SPIRIT (This is done when they cannot discredit the truth of scriptures!!)
And then, when SOLIDLY TRAPPED in their own fallacy, ‘God’ is just ****’A THING’****: Substance and Nature ****SHARED**** by father, son, and Holy Spirit.
And MOST STRANGELY, Unknown terms such as ‘GOD THE SON’, magically appear by desperate and purposefully deceptive means. In fact, untested by trini’s, this term actually states that the Son is A GOD in himself which they then hurriedly try to deny. After all, there are NO REGERENCES to ‘God the Son’ (Nnor also, ‘GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT) in any scriptures YET there are numerous references to ‘GOD THE FATHER’.
Now, as for ‘EQUALITY WITH GOD’… Which of the above are the trini’s and Jig’s using as their definition of ‘God’?
Answer required, please.
The Jews knew ONLY ONE GOD… Which of the above do you think they alluded to?
Answer required please.
The Jews knew of the saying from ‘GOD’ that ‘There is no God beside me!’. If they then were supposed to have understood Jesus’ claim that he was the ‘Son of God’ (No, not ‘GOD THE SON’!!) to mean that he was therefore EQUAL TO GOD, how does that sit with that God said, ‘I, alone, am your God’?
Was the ‘Substance and nature’ that spoke these words? Was it the THREE PERSONS who said, ‘I….ALONE’… But, in any case, IT WAS NOT THE JEWS who claimed that the ‘Son of God’ meant, ‘MAKING HIM EQUAL TO GOD’, but rather it is a claim MADE SUPPOSEDLY BY THE GOSPEL WRITER… (Or MORE LIKELY, a trinitarian translator).
I tried to find text anywhere that makes a claim that ‘A Son is Equal to his Father’ (notice the context changes here: ‘God’ … ‘Father’ because it makes NO SENSE to equate a PERSON with equality to A TITLE, therefore I CORRECTLY assume that ‘Equality to God’ was a trinitarian attempt NOT TO USE the correct term: ‘EQUALITY WITH THE FATHER’: Is Ivana Trump THE PRESIDENT and EQUAL TO THE PRESIDENT…I suppose Ivanca Trump is The President, too, and equal to the president…?)
But what is MOST STRANGE is that trinitarians DO NOT REFER TO JESUS’ response. They do not reference the FACT that Jesus went to pains to state, ‘I DID NOT CALL MYSELF GOD BUT ONLY THE SON OF GOD’….’Indeed, GOD called men of holy renown, ‘GOD’…(I am the true son of God because) I DO THE WORKS OF MY FATHER…’
Here, Jesus STATES that a TRUE SON of a Father (by which he denotes ‘FATHER’ as ‘GOD’) is one who ‘DOES THE WORKS OF THE FATHER’ (Does what the Father directs him to do) – a dig at the Jews who were not doing the works of their patriarch Father, Abraham (‘You are sons of Satan, for if you were sons of Abraham you would do what Abraham did!’).
Howis it then that when Jesus caps these Jews ‘Sons of Satan’ no trinitarian jumps up and claims a literal Satanic Fatherhood for them NOR in fact that they ARE EQUAL TO SATAN but rather ONLY THAT THEY ARE SONS OF HIM WHO THEY DO THE WORKS OF’?(bad English but, hey ho!)
Can anyone show me from Jewish customs or scriptures:
1) Where a Son is supposedly equal to his Father
(I use ‘Father’ instead of ‘God’ as ‘Son equal to God’ is nonsensical and an synergistical oxymoron)
2) What it means to be ‘A SON’
(And I don’t mean a ‘Flesh offspring’. Scriptures makes statements of ‘Sons of God’ in various verses in reference to both the Angels – who do the works of God – and the Apostles – Who do the works of God!)
Dear Jael,
I observe from your statements such as “Mary did not PROCREATE Jesus – God CREATED him. Her genes were not in Jesus”that you remove Jesus from any human bloodline,and I take it you do this to adhere to your last Adam theory-that since Adam had no father or mother,then neither did Jesus. So do you consider this scriptural cohesion? Where does it say Mary gave birth to the second or last Adam? which according to your theory Jesus wasn’t even her biological son. But what does Paul say about the last Adam?1 Cor15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.This is referring only to the resurrected,heavenly,spiritual Jesus not the earthly Jesus.Paul never knew the earthly Jesus and makes little mention of him except to say he was born of a woman,born under the law. But if your idea of Jesus not having even the genes of Mary then he is no son of man in human terms.
And as for the lineage of Jesus you say we as lay persons can come to no veritable conclusions? Research shows that the messianic line was supposed to come through Solomon not Nathan and a virgin birth dismisses both lines.
I just read this today and saw that you posted about the lineage of Yeshua. I think this will help you in that regards.
http://free.messianicbible.com/feature/yeshua-pass-first-messianic-test/
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
