Description: An
examination of the concept that Jesus is
the son of God from Christian sources.
The meaning of the term “Son of God” in
the Old and New Testament. One of
the most striking differences between a
cat and a lie is
that a cat has only nine lives.”
—Mark Twain, Pudd’nhead Wilson’s
Calendar
Son of God, son of David, or son of Man?
Jesus is identified as “son of David”
fourteen times in the New Testament,
starting with the very first verse
(Matthew 1:1). The Gospel of Luke
documents forty-one generations between
Jesus and David, while Matthew lists
twenty-six. Jesus, a distant descendant,
can only wear the “son of David” title
metaphorically. But how then should we
understand the title, “son of God?”
The “Trilemma,” a common proposal of
Christian missionaries, states that
“Jesus was either a lunatic, a liar, or
the Son of God, as he claimed to be.”
For the sake of argument, let’s agree
that Jesus was neither a lunatic nor a
liar. Let’s also agree he was precisely
what he claimed to be. But what,
exactly, was that? Jesus called himself
“Son of Man” frequently, consistently,
perhaps even emphatically, but where did
he call himself “Son of God?”
Let’s back up. What does “Son of God”
mean in the first place? No legitimate
Christian sect suggests that God took a
wife and had a child, and most certainly
none conceive that God fathered a child
through a human mother outside of
marriage. Furthermore, to suggest that
God physically mated with an element of
His creation is so far beyond the limits
of religious tolerance as to plummet
down the sheer cliff of blasphemy,
chasing the mythology of the Greeks.
With no rational explanation available
within the tenets of Christian doctrine,
the only avenue for closure is to claim
yet one more doctrinal mystery. Here is
where the Muslim recalls the question
posed in the Quran:
“How can He have a son
when He has no consort?” (Quran
6:101)
…while others shout, “But God can do
anything!” The Islamic position,
however, is that God doesn’t do
inappropriate things, only Godly things.
In the Islamic viewpoint, God’s
character is integral with His being and
consistent with His majesty.
So again, what does “Son of God” mean?
And if Jesus Christ has exclusive rights
to the term, why does the Bible record,
“...for I (God) am a father to Israel,
and Ephraim (i.e. Israel) is my
firstborn” (Jeremiah 31:9) and,
“...Israel is My son, even my firstborn”
(Exodus 4:22)? Taken in the context of
Romans 8:14, which reads, “For as many
as are led by the Spirit of God, they
are the sons of God,” many scholars
conclude that “Son of God” is
metaphorical and, as with christos,
doesn’t imply exclusivity. After all,
The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish
Religion confirms that in Jewish idiom
“Son of God” is clearly metaphorical. To
quote, “Son of God, term occasionally
found in Jewish literature, biblical and
post-biblical, but nowhere implying
physical descent from the Godhead.”[1]
Hasting’s Bible Dictionary comments:
In Semitic usage “sonship” is a
conception somewhat loosely employed to
denote moral rather than physical or
metaphysical relationship. Thus “sons of
Belial” (Jg 19:22 etc.) are wicked men,
not descendants of Belial; and in the NT
the “children of the bridechamber” are
wedding guests. So a “son of God” is a
man, or even a people, who reflect the
character of God. There is little
evidence that the title was used in
Jewish circles of the Messiah, and a
sonship which implied more than a moral
relationship would be contrary to Jewish
monotheism.[2]
And in any case, the list of candidates
for “son of God” begins with Adam, as
per Luke 3:38: “...Adam, which was the
son of God.”
Those who rebut by quoting Matthew 3:17
(“And suddenly a voice came from heaven,
saying, ‘This is My beloved son, in whom
I am well pleased’”) have overlooked the
point that the Bible describes many
people, Israel and Adam included, as
“sons of God.” Both II Samuel 7:13-14
and I Chronicles 22:10 read, “He
(Solomon) shall build a house for My
name, and I will establish the throne of
his kingdom forever. I will be his
Father, and he shall be My son.”
Entire nations are referred to as sons,
or children of God. Examples include:
Genesis 6:2, “That the
sons of God saw the daughters of men.”
Genesis 6:4, “There were giants on the
earth in those days, and also afterward,
when the sons of God came in to the
daughters of men…”
Deuteronomy 14:1, “Ye are the children
of the Lord your God.”
Job 1:6, “Now there was a day when the
sons of God came to present themselves
before the LORD…”
Job 2:1, “Again there was a day when the
sons of God came to present themselves
before the LORD…”
Job 38:7, “When the morning stars sang
together, and all the sons of God
shouted for joy?”
Philippians 2:15, “that you may become
blameless and harmless, children of God
without fault in the midst of a crooked
and perverse generation…”
1 John 3:1-2, “Behold what manner of
love the Father has bestowed on us, that
we should be called children of God! …
Beloved, now we are children of God…”
In Matthew 5:9 Jesus says, “Blessed are
the peacemakers, for they shall be
called sons of God.” Later in Matthew
5:45, Jesus prescribed to his followers
the attainment of noble attributes,
“that you may be sons of your Father in
heaven.” Not exclusively his Father, but
their Father …
Jesus Christ - Son of God? (part 2 of
2): “Son” or “Slave”?
Description: An examination of the
concept that Jesus is the son of God
from Christian sources. Part two: A
look at the orginal Greek and Hebrew
words translated to “son”.
Christian clergy openly
acknowledge that Jesus never called
himself “son of God,” however they claim
that others did. This too has an answer.
Investigating the manuscripts that make
up the New Testament, one finds that the
alleged “sonship” of Jesus is based upon
the mistranslation of two Greek words—pais
and huios, both of which are translated
as “son.” However, this translation
appears disingenuous. The Greek word
pais derives from the Hebrew ebed, which
bears the primary meaning of servant, or
slave. Hence, the primary translation of
pais theou is “servant of God,” with
“child” or “son of God” being an
extravagant embellishment. According to
the Theological Dictionary of the New
Testament, “The Hebrew original of pais
in the phrase pais theou, i.e., ebed,
carries a stress on personal
relationship and has first the sense of
‘slave.’”[1] This is all the more
interesting because it dovetails
perfectly with the prophecy of Isaiah
42:1, upheld in Matthew 12:18: “Behold,
My servant [i.e., from the Greek pais]
whom I have chosen, My beloved in whom
my soul is well pleased …” Whether a
person reads the King James Version, New
King James Version, New Revised Standard
Version, or New International Version,
the word is “servant” in all cases.
Considering that the purpose of
revelation is to make the truth of God
clear, one might think this passage an
unsightly mole on the face of the
doctrine of divine sonship. After all,
what better place for God to have
declared Jesus His son? What better
place to have said, “Behold, My son whom
I have begotten …”? But He didn’t say
that. For that matter, the doctrine
lacks biblical support in the recorded
words of both Jesus and God, and there
is good reason to wonder why. Unless,
that is, Jesus was nothing more than the
servant of God this passage describes.
Regarding the religious use of the word
ebed, “The term serves as an expression
of humility used by the righteous before
God.”[2] Furthermore, “After 100 B.C.
pais theou more often means “servant of
God,” as when applied to Moses, the
prophets, or the three children (Bar.
1:20; 2:20; Dan. 9:35).”[3] A person can
easily get into doctrinal quicksand: “Of
eight instances of this phrase, one
refers to Israel (Lk. 1:54), two refer
to David (Lk 1:69; Acts 4:25), and the
other five to Jesus (Mt. 12:18; Acts
3:13, 26; 4:27, 30)…. In the few
instances in which Jesus is called pais
theou we obviously have early
tradition.”[4] So Jesus did not have
exclusive rights to this term, and where
it was employed the term “obviously”
stemmed from “early tradition.”
Furthermore, the translation, if
impartial, should identify all
individuals to whom the phrase was
applied in similar manner. Such,
however, has not been the case. Whereas
pais has been translated “servant” in
reference to David (Acts 4:25 and Luke
1:69) and Israel (Luke 1:54), it is
translated “Son” or “holy child” in
reference to Jesus (Acts 3:13; 3:26;
4:27; 4:30). Such preferential treatment
is canonically consistent, but logically
flawed.
Lastly an interesting, if not key,
religious parallel is uncovered: “Thus
the Greek phrase pais tou theou,
‘servant of God,’ has exactly the same
connotation as the Muslim name Abdallah—the
‘servant of Allah.’”[5]
The symmetry is all the more shocking,
for the Holy Qur’an relates Jesus as
having identified himself as just this—Abdallah
(abd being Arabic for slave or servant,
Abd-Allah [also spelled “Abdullah”]
meaning slave or servant of Allah).
According to the story, when Mary
returned to her family with the newborn
Jesus, they accused her of being
unchaste. Speaking from the cradle in a
miracle that gave credence to his
claims, baby Jesus defended his mother’s
virtue with the words, “Inni Abdullah …”
which means, “I am indeed a servant of
Allah …” (TMQ 19:30)
Translation of the New Testament Greek
huios to “son” (in the literal meaning
of the word) is similarly flawed. On
page 1210 of Kittel and Friedrich’s
Theological Dictionary of the New
Testament, the meaning of huios journeys
from the literal (Jesus the son of
Mary), to mildly metaphorical (believers
as sons of the king [Matt. 17:25-26]),
to politely metaphorical (God’s elect
being sons of Abraham [Luke 19:9]), to
colloquially metaphorical (believers as
God’s sons [Matt. 7:9 and Heb 12:5]), to
spiritually metaphorical (students as
sons of the Pharisees [Matt. 12:27, Acts
23:6]), to biologically metaphorical (as
in John 19:26, where Jesus describes his
favorite disciple to Mary as “her son”),
to blindingly metaphorical as “sons of
the kingdom” (Matt. 8:12), “sons of
peace” (Luke. 10:6), “sons of light”
(Luke. 16:8), and of everything from
“sons of this world” (Luke 16:8) to
“sons of thunder” (Mark 3:17). It is as
if this misunderstood word for “son” is
waving a big sign on which is painted in
bold letters: METAPHOR! Or, as Stanton
eloquently puts it, “Most scholars agree
that the Aramaic or Hebrew word behind
‘son’ is ‘servant.’ So as the Spirit
descends on Jesus at his baptism, Jesus
is addressed by the voice from heaven in
terms of Isaiah 42:1: ‘Behold my servant
… my chosen … I have put my Spirit upon
him.’ So although Mark 1:11 and 9:7
affirm that Jesus is called by God to a
special messianic task, the emphasis is
on Jesus’ role as the anointed servant,
rather than as Son of God.”[6]