2001-4-3 21:50:00
The second reason that believers see Jesus as God is because he is often referred to as a or the Son of God. Now if we show that we are also Sons of God just as Jesus was (and is) then this means we are entitled to be called Gods just as he is.
Most orthodox Christians insist that Jesus be called THE Son of God. I have made the mistake of mentioning my belief in Jesus as "a" Son of God and they about have a fit as if I am speaking great sacrilege. I have had them retort back that Jesus is "the" one and only Son of God.
It would be incorrect to refer to Jesus as "the" one and only son of God if we are also His sons and daughters. If you and I are also Sons then it is impossible for Jesus to be the only one.
The word "the" is used to identify a "particular person place or thing." Therefore, if there is only one Son of God we should always use "the" in describing his sonship. If there is more than one Son of God then "the" could still be used with it but the grammar would indicate that only a "particular" or one Son of God is under discussion when we are using a singular noun. For instance, there are thousands of hats, but when I tell the clerk "Give me the hat" I mean only one hat, a particular hat.
On the other hand, the word "a" refers to one out of many. If I say "Give me a hat" I am saying there is more than one hat and to grab anyone of them and give it to me. If we say that Jesus is "a" Son of God it means that he is one of many. This, the orthodox believer does not want to admit. So he insists that Jesus always be called "The Son of God," as if he is the only one in existence.
But is he?
Not hardly. We have already quoted the scripture which tells us that the "SONS of God" shouted for joy at the creation of the earth. (Job 38)
Also in Job we read: "Now there was a day when the SONS of God came to present themselves before the Lord...." (Job 1:6)
At the beginning of civilization we are told "That the SONS of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose." (Gen 6:2)
Luke speaks of "Adam, which was the son of God." (Luke 3:38)
The greatest proof that it is appropriate to call Jesus "a" Son of God is found in the words of Jesus himself. He usually used the term "son of man" and there was only one time when Jesus was on the earth that he definitely used the term "Son of God" in relation to himself and amazingly he called himself "a" Son; not "the." Unfortunately most translators distort the meaning of this particular scripture and add a "the" which is not even there:
"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken: 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?" (John 10:34-36)
The word "son" in the Biblical Greek is HUIOS. The key word "THE" is nowhere to be found in the original Greek. In this context the normal rendering would be "A Son of God." Unfortunately none of the translators have the guts to translate it with the greatest accuracy. Even so some of them are honest enough to translate without the word "THE."
Here are some examples:
"Of him whom the Father did sanctify, and send to the world, do ye say -- Thou speakest evil, because I said, Son of God I am?" (Young's Literal Translation - YLT)
"Do ye say of him whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am Son of God?" (Darby Translation)
"Say ye of him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am [the] Son of God?" [American Standard Version (ASV)]
At least the ASV was honest enough to put "the" in parenthesis to indicate that it is not in the original.
Then we have my favorite translation, which stays very close to the original -- is from The Concordant version of the Bible:
"Are you saying to Him Whom the Father hallows and dispatches into the world that you are blaspheming, seeing that I said, 'Son of God am I'?"
It is interesting that none of the translators dare translate it as the context would be rendered if they were talking about anyone but Jesus which would be:
"Do ye say of him whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am A Son of God?"
If it was all right for Jesus himself to say he was a son of God then what is the big deal about me, you or any other person also expressing a belief in Jesus as "a" Son of God? This certainly does not belittle him or take away from the fact that he was the greatest entity in the history of civilization and that he was the first to demonstrate divine sonship and even overcome death. It does, however, change him from our dictator to our brother, but that is in accord with his words, for he called us his brethren.
There are so many scriptural references proving that man is also a son of God that it shouldn't be necessary to recite them. Nevertheless, the world wants to continue to call Jesus "THE Son of God" as if he were a son in a way that we are not. The amazing point is that no where in the Bible is this taught or indicated. None of the Bible writers say that Jesus is a son of God and we are not. In fact they say over and over again that we are sons like him:
"Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be CALLED THE SONS OF GOD: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. Beloved, now are WE THE SONS OF GOD, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that when he shall appear, WE SHALL BE LIKE HIM; for we shall see him as he is." (1 John 3:1-2)
Let us continue with a few more quotes:
"But as many as received him (Christ) to them gave he power to become the SONS OF GOD." (John 1:12)
"He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God; and he shall be my son." (Rev 21:7)
"For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that WE ARE THE CHILDREN OF GOD: And if children, then heirs; HEIRS OF GOD, AND JOINT HEIRS WITH CHRIST...." (Rom 8:14-17)
Here are more:
"Ye are the children of the Lord." (Deut 14:1)
"And (God) will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty." (2 Cor 6:18)
"Ye are sons of the Living God." (Hosea 1:10)
To Solomon God said: "He shall be my son and I will be his Father." (1 Chron 22:10)
In what way is God both our Father and the Father of Jesus Christ? In other words, how are both regular humanity and Jesus Sons of God?
To help answer this we must clarify the meaning of the word "Father." To be a Father is to be "the originator of a creation". Thus God is called the "Father of the heavens and the earth" or the Father of all things. We also have our "Founding Fathers" who originated our constitution and Edison the Father of the light bulb and so on. In a more literal way a father is a parent who is the originating source of the child who is in his basic image and intelligence and has a capacity of becoming like the father at maturity.
By the first definition we can see that there is no argument that God is the Father of both ordinary humanity and Jesus Christ as well as all things, living and non living. In this way God is definitely our Father, and Jesus and ourselves are sons. In this category no one can argue that Jesus is "a Son" because by this definition more than one son is involved.
By the second definition, however, we still find that Jesus and men are brethren with the same Father. We have already quoted the scripture which says that "the Spirit beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God [...] and JOINT HEIRS WITH CHRIST...." (Rom 8:17)
If we are children of a different category than was Jesus then why are we joint heirs with him???
Obviously, we are joint heirs because we are children of the same Father as indicated: "Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection to the FATHER OF SPIRITS, and live? (Heb 12:9)
Just as our flesh has a father here so do our spirits and the Father of all of our spirits is God. This would include ordinary men and women as well as Jesus. So here again we find that Jesus is again our brother and we have God as a mutual father. Thus we are not in error by stating that from this respect Jesus is "a" son of God along with the rest of us.
The only possible way that Jesus was a Son of God in a way that we are not is in reference to the biblical story that he was born of a virgin and had no earthly father. There are a number of interpretations to this account. The most common is that the Spirit of God merely came upon Mary and she conceived a son. Another one is that God came down in a physical body and had sex with Mary and she thus conceived. A third is that she was conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, but it was while the Holy Ghost was in Joseph, her espoused mate.
Whatever the case, if a virgin birth qualifies one for godhood then Adam had a double dose of it for he was conceived by neither an earthly father or mother, and Eve, his wife should qualify to be a goddess for she was born from the virgin Adam.
Melchezedec should also qualify under this criteria for of him it was written that he was "without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the (a) Son of God." (Heb 7:3)
So here we see that we cannot say that Jesus is the one and only Son of God because he was born of a virgin because we have at least three other people from the Bible that have this qualification and more.
With all this evidence it is difficult to see how anyone can say that Jesus is the one and only Son of God. He is perhaps the greatest of the Sons of God, from among mankind but no where does it indicate that he is the only one.
Questions:
Why do you suppose dedicated religious ones are so fixed on insisting that Jesus is "the" one and only son of God?
Does fear play a part in their unwillingness to look at the facts? How?
-- End Of Part Seven --
Go to:
Previous Chapter
Next Chapter
Index of Chapters
Copyright 2001 by J.J. Dewey, All Rights Reserved