A SPIN-OFF from "JESUS IS GOD PART 2"

[robert derrick]

Because of that thread I discovered a hidden treasure (hidden to me anyway)...
So here is what caught my attention:...

I find it very interesting that in Mark 14 Jesus refers to Himself as the Son of man...Mark 14 (KJV)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
²⁰ And he answered and said unto them, It is one of the twelve, that dippeth with me in the dish.
²¹ The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.

…
⁴¹ And he cometh the third time, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: it is enough, the hour is come; behold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners.
⁴² Rise up, let us go; lo, he that betrayeth me is at hand.

…
⁶¹ But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
⁶² And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
⁶³ Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?
⁶⁴ Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.

Jesus never spoke from His lips He was the Son of God...but there are several scriptures where it is implied...

Ex:Matthew 26 (KJV)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
⁶³ But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.
⁶⁴ Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

So Jesus true nature has to be revealed....amen?

While we know from Scripture that the Word was with God, and was God, and was made flesh to be named Jesus Christ the Son of God, it is actually the argument of 'ousia' from the Nicene council that explains how this is so:

Ousia is nature and substance. The nature and substance of one's being.

And Being is the best word to use in English: There has always Been from everlasting One Being that is God: the One Being God always and forever.

In the beginning of creation, the One Being God became Three Being God: God, the Word, and the Spirit.

The understanding of it in nature is by knowing the substance and nature of celestial light:

The sun is being a star shining light all around, and so the sun is seen a perfectly round and shining object, disc, and orb Being the Sun:

But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings.

Now take of that One Being the Sun and make Three Being the Sun side by side, One on the left hand, and One on the right hand: The One Being seen, to become Three Being seen: and the One Being The Word, to become the One Being the Son is called of Scripture itself: The Sun of righteousness, the One Being God from the beginning of creation.

The One Being God is now made Three Being God by God: not three gods being God, nor another god beside God. Neither is it ex nihilo something made out of nothing, but is the same exact One Being made Three.

God made Himself by Himself Three to Be Himself: Nothing is too hard nor impossible for God to do.

Carnal man who does not like to see what he cannot think for himself will never believe the One God became Three, and so never worship the Son as Being God Himself, and so will never ever see God and the Lamb on His throne in the eternal future.

Why? Because they will only believe in and worship a 'God', of their own choosing, that they can believe as 'possible' to their own carnal minds.

 

[robert derrick]

Now check this out...
Here is what I believe it is showing us...Jesus never called Himself "Son of God" because He is God....but always referred to Himself as "Son of man" because He is God made flesh....
But everytime someone else referred to Him as the "Son of God" He did not deny it but to Peter He said:
Matthew 16 (KJV)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
¹⁵ He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
¹⁶ And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
¹⁷ And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

So I am curious about this and have meditated on it and concluded that it had to be revealed to man by the Father, and then later after His crucifixion it is revealed by the Holy Spirit....so Jesus true nature has to be revealed....amen?

In the beginning of creation, the One Being God became Three Being God: God, the Word, and the Spirit.

The ousia substance and nature is the same One Being in the Three, without any loss of the One Being God

God created the heaven and the earth as Three Being One, so that God commanded, the Word spoke, and the Spirit moved:

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth.

I became Us, and My became Our:

Let us make man in Our Image: according to Our Nature and Being.

And breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

A living soul is the image of God the Word, who would become flesh and who's soul took upon Himself the sins of the world. By the Spirit His soul went into hell to preach to them in prison, and then By Himself raised His body from the dead:

Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

In the beginning of creation, the One Being God became Three Being God: God, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and when the Word was made flesh, the Three Being God was The Father, The Son, and the Holy Ghost.

And so now forever, the One Being God are Three Being God:

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

There Three Being God are One God in heaven.

Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.

The form and shape of God is the Being of God, which no man has seen at anytime, nor known His shape:

And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.

Jesus was the One Being God in the flesh, sent of the One Being the Father in the throne, and the One Being God the Spirit went before the Son to prepare a body for Him, and was with the Son on earth to do the work of the Son, that the Father commanded from heaven.

And so the Father was the only true God in heaven, and the Son was the true God on earth with the Spirit, and so spoke to the Father lifting gup His eyes to heaven to do so.

And so now the Father commands the Light of His Son to shine out of His new creature, to be born of the One Being God by His perfect seed promised of Christ.

 

[Heart2Soul]

In the beginning of creation, the One Being God became Three Being God: God, the Word, and the Spirit.

The ousia substance and nature is the same One Being in the Three, without any loss of the One Being God

God created the heaven and the earth as Three Being One, so that God commanded, the Word spoke, and the Spirit moved:

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth.

I became Us, and My became Our:

Let us make man in Our Image: according to Our Nature and Being.

And breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

A living soul is the image of God the Word, who would become flesh and who's soul took upon Himself the sins of the world. By the Spirit His soul went into hell to preach to them in prison, and then By Himself raised His body from the dead:

Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

In the beginning of creation, the One Being God became Three Being God: God, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and when the Word was made flesh, the Three Being God was The Father, The Son, and the Holy Ghost.

And so now forever, the One Being God are Three Being God:

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

There Three Being God are One God in heaven.

Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.

The form and shape of God is the Being of God, which no man has seen at anytime, nor known His shape:

And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.

Jesus was the One Being God in the flesh, sent of the One Being the Father in the throne, and the One Being God the Spirit went before the Son to prepare a body for Him, and was with the Son on earth to do the work of the Son, that the Father commanded from heaven.

And so the Father was the only true God in heaven, and the Son was the true God on earth with the Spirit, and so spoke to the Father lifting gup His eyes to heaven to do so.

And so now the Father commands the Light of His Son to shine out of His new creature, to be born of the One Being God by His perfect seed promised of Christ.

I think you already posted this.

 

[farouk]

I am a believer of the Trinitarian teaching.
I believe Jesus is the Son of God and the Son of Man....

@Heart2Soul God in Three Persons and the Deity of Christ are overwhelming attested doctrines in Scripture...

 

[robert derrick]

The premise in @Heart2Soul's original posts is that Jesus referred to Himself as Son of Man but not Son of God along with the commensurate implications.

Heart2Soul's premise is flawed because:

"He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God" (Jesus Christ, John 3:18)

"Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live" (Jesus Christ, John 5:25).

"This sickness is not to end in death, but for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified by it" (Jesus Christ, John 11:4).

Note a difference in how Lord Jesus refers to Himself as the Son of Man, such as "the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands" (Jesus Christ, Matthew 17:12) for God cannot die.

Behold, a HUGE difference between Jesus referring to himself as Son of Man in some instances and Son of God in some instances with:

"I said, ‘I am the Son of God’" (Jesus Christ, John 10:36).

The HUGE difference here is that Jesus says that He says "I am the Son of God", yet He does not say "I am the Son of Man".

The HUGE difference here is that Jesus says that He says "I am the Son of God", yet He does not say "I am the Son of Man"

Good point. Jesus referred to Himself in the third person as the son of man, which only pertains to the flesh, which was made of a woman, but calls Himself the Son of God, as does Scripture, which is His Being God in the flesh.

And so, your point is well taken, in that His flesh was of no profit to Him, and the death of that body was nothing to fear.

Who Jesus was, was not His flesh, even as who we are, is not our bodies: We are souls skinned with flesh only.

Who Jesus was in the flesh was the One God Being on earth, while the One God the Father was Being on the throne:

He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.

Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person.

The express image, form, and shape of the One true God is His One true Being: the One Being who is God, who became Three at creation, so that to see One of the Three is to see each of the Three, because they are all One and the Same Being of God.

For the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

Only God can shine His Light, and only God can be His Light shining:

To say there is a created christ, is therefore to say christ was created ex nihilo of nothing, as with all creation and creatures created by God.

And so the created christ of nothing, is the brightness of the glory of nothing, the light of a god that lightens nothing, and is the express image of the god who is no person at all: the god of this world, who is no god, and has no glory nor light to shine.

Lucifer created another christ of his own to be in the flesh in order to decieve them into believing himself as God, rather the the Father and the Son:

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

 

[robert derrick]

I think you already posted this.

If I did elsewhere, it wasn't this one. This one is newly made.

I believe Jesus is the Son of God and the Son of Man....

He is the Son of God and was the son of man in the days of His flesh.

You can look at the other post, where he makes the distinction between Jesus speaking of himself in the third person as a man, but called Himself with Scripture the Son of God.

The man Christ Jesus is no longer the son of man, because the body of the son of man died on the cross, when He left it behind by the Spirit.

We are now children of men by the flesh, but in the resurrection, we will no longer be children of men, but brethren of the resurrected Lord and God.

 

[Heart2Soul]

The premise in @Heart2Soul's original posts is that Jesus referred to Himself as Son of Man but not Son of God along with the commensurate implications.

Heart2Soul's premise is flawed because:

"He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God" (Jesus Christ, John 3:18)

"Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live" (Jesus Christ, John 5:25).

"This sickness is not to end in death, but for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified by it" (Jesus Christ, John 11:4).

Note a difference in how Lord Jesus refers to Himself as the Son of Man, such as "the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands" (Jesus Christ, Matthew 17:12) for God cannot die.

Behold, a HUGE difference between Jesus referring to himself as Son of Man in some instances and Son of God in some instances with:

"I said, ‘I am the Son of God’" (Jesus Christ, John 10:36).

The HUGE difference here is that Jesus says that He says "I am the Son of God", yet He does not say "I am the Son of Man".

Do you realize you are purposely misinterpreting my OP statement and falsely accusing me of saying Jesus is not the Son of God?
I am not going to explain it to you but instead I am asking @Hidden In Him if he can explain to you the meaning behind the OP statement.

 

[Kermos]

Do you realize you are purposely misinterpreting my OP statement and falsely accusing me of saying Jesus is not the Son of God?
I am not going to explain it to you but instead I am asking @Hidden In Him if he can explain to you the meaning behind the OP statement.

You specifically wrote in the OP:

Jesus never spoke from His lips He was the Son of God

and you wrote in your followup:

Jesus never called Himself "Son of God"

@Heart2Soul, throughout this thread, I haven't accused you of saying Jesus is not the Son of God. If I have, then please show me where.

I am astounded by the reticence, the avoidance, of a professing Christian to answer such a question about the Christ's words.

As recorded here you wrote "Ok", but you wrote you did not mean "Ok":

You wrote that you started a Bible study. I posed a question to you about the Word of God.

A Christian is ready in season and out of season.

Your response does not tell me your thoughts about a specific saying of Lord Jesus Christ.

A response of "Ok" means an agreement as in "your writing is Ok" versus "your writing is not Ok" (which is disagreement).

You responded "Ok", then you responded that your "Ok" did not really mean "Ok" while at the time you didn't actually answer the specific question.

Please, answer the question.

Do you now agree that Jesus was talking about Himself when He says words, "I said, ‘I am the Son of God’" (John 10:36)?

So, I ask again.

Do you now agree that Jesus was talking about Himself when He says words, "I said, ‘I am the Son of God’" (John 10:36)?

 

[Hidden In Him]

So, I ask again.

Do you now agree that Jesus was talking about Himself when He says words, "I said, ‘I am the Son of God’" (John 10:36)?

Hello, Kermos.

On face value, technically you are correct in saying that Jesus said on a few occasions that He was the Son of God. Heart2Soul's contention, however, is that this was divinely revealed, and therefore not something He readily made public. In John 10:36, He is using the term in the same sense as that the judges in Israel were sons of God. In John 3:18, He is using it because Nicodemus said, "You know that you are from God." In John 5:25, He refuses to back off His claim that God is His Father and that He is equal with God before the Jews by stating outright that He is the Son of God. But as a rule, this was not something He went about telling people. H2S's point is that He generally referred to Himself as the Son of Man rather than the Son of God, because not all would understand it, as is clearly evidenced by the way the Jews reacted in that passage.

 

[Heart2Soul]

Hello, Kermos.

On face value, technically you are correct in saying that Jesus said on a few occasions that He was the Son of God. Heart2Soul's contention, however, is that this was divinely revealed, and therefore not something He readily made public. In John 10:36, He is using the term in the same sense as that the judges in Israel were sons of God. In John 3:18, He is using it because Nicodemus said, "You know that you are from God." In John 5:25, He refuses to back off His claim that God is His Father and that He is equal with God before the Jews by stating outright that He is the Son of God. But as a rule, this was not something He went about telling people. H2S's point is that He generally referred to Himself as the Son of Man rather than the Son of God, because not all would understand it, as is clearly evidenced by the way the Jews reacted in that passage.

Thank you brother....you have a wonderful gift of teaching so even a child can understand.

 

[Mayflower]

Two things, @Mayflower, strike me based on your writings:

1. if what Jesus said in John 10:30 and John 10:36 are equivalents as you assert, then according to your linguistical assertion He says He is the Son of God in both verses because they are synonymous.
2. If John had written "Jesus said, ‘I am the Son of God’" someplace, then it would carry the same impact as Jesus saying "I said" in His statement of "I said, ‘I am the Son of God’" (John 10:36).

The indisputable Truth is that Jesus did say "I am the Son of God" from His lips!

Exactly. They are one and the same.

Jesus spoke how He did for a reason as for the reasons Heart2Soul is explaining in the OP. Faith is confident assurance...Jesus said things in a subtle way, to bring about faith. It is something that people must come to believe that Jesus is the Son of God.

 

[Heart2Soul]

Exactly. They are one and the same.

Jesus spoke how He did for a reason as for the reasons Heart2Soul is explaining in the OP. Faith is confident assurance...Jesus said things in a subtle way, to bring about faith. It is something that people must come to believe that Jesus is the Son of God.

In my studying I found this and it makes sense...

 

[Kermos]

Thank you brother....you have a wonderful gift of teaching so even a child can understand.

I am addressing the question directly to you @Heart2Soul because you are the one who wrote in the OP:

Jesus never spoke from His lips He was the Son of God

@Hidden In Him did not address that you wrote that, nor that you wrote in your followup:

Jesus never called Himself "Son of God"

@Heart2Soul, throughout this thread, I haven't accused you of saying Jesus is not the Son of God. I requested but you failed to show where. No apology from you on that.

As recorded here you wrote "Ok", but you wrote you did not mean "Ok":

You wrote that you started a Bible study. I posed a question to you about the Word of God.

A Christian is ready in season and out of season.

Your response does not tell me your thoughts about a specific saying of Lord Jesus Christ.

A response of "Ok" means an agreement as in "your writing is Ok" versus "your writing is not Ok" (which is disagreement).

You responded "Ok", then you responded that your "Ok" did not really mean "Ok" while at the time you didn't actually answer the specific question.

Please, answer the question.

Do you now agree that Jesus was talking about Himself when He says words, "I said, ‘I am the Son of God’" (John 10:36)?

I am astounded by the reticence, the avoidance, of a professing Christian to answer such a question about the Christ's words.

Here is the question for you, @Heart2Soul.

Do you now agree that Jesus was talking about Himself when He says words, "I said, ‘I am the Son of God’" (John 10:36)?

 

[Heart2Soul]

I am addressing the question directly to you @Heart2Soul because you are the one who wrote in the OP:



@Hidden In Him did not address that you wrote that, nor that you wrote in your followup:



@Heart2Soul, throughout this thread, I haven't accused you of saying Jesus is not the Son of God. I requested but you failed to show where. No apology from you on that.

As recorded here you wrote "Ok", but you wrote you did not mean "Ok":



I am astounded by the reticence, the avoidance, of a professing Christian to answer such a question about the Christ's words.

Here is the question for you, @Heart2Soul.

Do you now agree that Jesus was talking about Himself when He says words, "I said, ‘I am the Son of God’" (John 10:36)?

You are harassing me....like Calvinists members in the past did...
Jesus replied to the priests...
Luke 22 (KJV)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
⁶⁷ Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe:
⁶⁸ And if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go.
⁶⁹ Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God.
⁷⁰ Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.
⁷¹ And they said, What need we any further witness? for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth.

 

[Pierac]

Because of that thread I discovered a hidden treasure (hidden to me anyway)...
So here is what caught my attention:...

I find it very interesting that in Mark 14 Jesus refers to Himself as the Son of man...Mark 14 (KJV)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Jesus never spoke from His lips He was the Son of God...but there are several scriptures where it is implied...

Ex:Matthew 26 (KJV)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
⁶³ But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.
⁶⁴ Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

Messiah - Most of us are more familiar with the Greek translation of this word, which is "Christos" or "Christ" in English. People have made this title of Jesus into Jesus’ surname. But it is not his name, it is his title. Jesus Christ means Jesus the Christ (Messiah). When we say that we are Christians, we are saying that we are Messianist, or followers of the Messiah. The definition of Messiah has been practically lost. A proper understanding of this title is critical if we are ever going to fully understand who Jesus is.

Messiah - Hebrew word signifying "one who has been anointed." The anointed agent of Yahweh. The kings of Israel were anointed with oil in the name of God, which symbolized his investiture with the Spirit of God. The term Messiah was later used to designate a "future king," an expected royal leader from the line of David who would restore the kingdom to Israel. A king who would make all things new, consecrated as Yahweh’s vicegerent in Israel. This son of David, who was expected by the Jewish nation, was the Messiah par excellence, a term that has been rendered in Greek by Christos (NABD & The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, vol. 2, pg 344 (ZEB)) .

That the Messiah is supposed to be a king is a well-known fact by anyone who has studied the Bible in depth. Because it was customary to anoint kings, the phrase "The LORD’s anointed" became a synonym for "king" (ZEB, vol.1, pg. 171). This fact can be verified by many verses. Even on the cross the inscription read, "The king of the Jews" (Mark 15:26). I will cover a few verses and then list some more for your own study:

Mark 15:32: "Let the Messiah, the King of Israel, come down now from the cross."

John 1:40 & 49: "We have found the Messiah…Rabbi, you are the Son of God; the king of Israel."

Luke 19:38: "Blessed is the king (Jesus) who comes in the name of the Lord (YHWH).

Other verses: Jeremiah 23:5, Daniel 7:13, Psalms 2:6, Zechariah 9:9, Acts 17:7, 2 Timothy 4:1. There are many more. The Zondervan Pictoral Encyclopedia of the Bible vol. 4 pg.200 says:

"If God’s purpose is not to be defeated, the true Messiah = King as God’s authentic Servant is the only answer. In Heb. Categories the remedy is centered upon a person and not upon an abstract doctrine or an ideal system. There can be no Messianic kingdom without God’s anointed King."

As we can see, the Messiah is an actual king of Israel, the ideal king of Israel. He is a man who is anointed by God’s spirit. The Messiah is able to perform mighty signs because God has anointed him with His Spirit, not because he is God. It is God working through Jesus. These three verses explain this point better than I ever could:

Acts 10:38: "how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power. He went about doing good and healing all those oppressed by the devil, for God was with him."

Acts 2:22: "Jesus of Nazareth was a man commended to you by God with mighty deeds, wonders, and signs, which God worked through him in your midst, as you yourselves know."

Matthew 12:18: "Behold, my servant whom I have chosen, my beloved in whom I delight; I shall place my spirit upon him."

All the Old Testament Messianic prophecies speak of a man anointed by God’s Spirit. None of them mention that the Messiah is supposed to be God. The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible vol.4 pg.201 states of the Messiah:

"But at all times he is the one who acts in the power and under the guidance of the God of Israel."

The Jews today (because they failed to recognize Jesus as the Messiah) are still waiting for the Messiah to come. But if you ask a rabbi who the Messiah is supposed to be (as I did), he will tell you what all these sources have said, that he will be a man anointed by God’s Spirit. We must always remember that the Messiah is the ideal anointed king of Israel who will reign in God’s kingdom to come, the Messianic kingdom. The confusion lies in that God did not come AS Jesus, He came IN Jesus.

Son of God - This title for Jesus has been given meanings and attributes that were never intended. People have erroneously used the human father-son relationship to describe this title of Jesus’. They have thought that since a human son has the actual essence (made of the same matter) of his father, that therefore, this title implies that Jesus being the Son of God is of the same essence of God. This conclusion will lead you right into the Doctrine of the Trinity. This is the formula they adopted at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD when they said:

"The Son is of the same substance as the Father."

It was at this council that Jesus was first made God. The Holy Spirit interestingly enough was not included in the formula. It was included fifty-six years later at another council. Let’s see what this title really means:

Son of God - In the Old Testament Israel is described as God’s first-born (Exodus 4:22) and is called His son. There is therefore precedence for calling the Messiah "Son of God" for he is Israel’s representative par excellence (ZEB, vol.4, pg.203-204).

"Son of God" denotes an intimate relationship with the Father. It is obvious that sonship must not be understood in a crude pagan way. This bears out Dalman’s contention that the Hebrew concept of "son" does not denote an extensive circle of relationships" (ZEB, vol.4, pg. 205). Adam was called the "son of God" (Luke 3:38), God calls King Solomon His "son" in 1 Chronicles 28:6.

For Paul, "Son of God" is essentially a Christological description expressing "the Son’s solidarity with God" (ZEB, vol.4, pg.204). Closeness to the Father is the basic meaning of "Son of God"(Ibid). This closeness was a relationship that was shared by God’s anointed kings of Israel. Since Jesus is the ideal king of Israel, he is naturally the ideal Son of God. This is how the term came to be synonymous with Messiah and king of Israel. They are all different ways of saying the same thing.

The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible vol. 4 pg. 204 states:

"The last chapter of the first epistle of John makes every possible emphasis upon the principle that Sonship is the mark of Messiahship. The same is the case with the fourth gospel where the Son of God is synonymous with Messiah and occurs more frequently than any other title. Haenchen maintains that the same equation:

Messiah = Son of God = Son of Man applies to Mark’s gospel. The same can be said of the rest of the New Testament."

Aspects of Monotheism pg.90 states:

"The notion that the Davidic king was the son of God is well established in the Hebrew Bible in 2 Samuel 7:14 and in Psalm 2:7. It was only natural then that the coming messianic king should also be regarded as the Son of God. To say that the king was the son of God, however, does not necessarily imply divinization."

This is the meaning of the title "Son of God." Messiah = Son of God = king of Israel = Son of Man. The Messiah does have the closest and most intimate relationship with the Father. Let’s take a look at some verses to confirm this.

"The kings of the earth rise up, and the princes conspire together against the LORD and His anointed (Messiah)"… "I myself have set up my king on Zion (Israel)"… "The LORD said to me, "You are my son" (Psalm 2:2,6-7).

Here we see God speaking of the Messiah using all three titles; Messiah, king of Zion, and son.

"He first found his own brother and told him, "We have found the Messiah"…"Rabbi, you are the Son of God: you are the King of Israel" (John 1:41& 49).

John cannot be clearer on this title; the Son of God is the King of Israel. This is the Jewish meaning of "Son of God." Any other definition will take away from the true meaning of the title into something that was never intended by its Jewish author.

Taken from the studies of Dr Juan Baxeras

 

[robert derrick]

Hello, Kermos.

On face value, technically you are correct in saying that Jesus said on a few occasions that He was the Son of God. Heart2Soul's contention, however, is that this was divinely revealed, and therefore not something He readily made public. In John 10:36, He is using the term in the same sense as that the judges in Israel were sons of God. In John 3:18, He is using it because Nicodemus said, "You know that you are from God." In John 5:25, He refuses to back off His claim that God is His Father and that He is equal with God before the Jews by stating outright that He is the Son of God. But as a rule, this was not something He went about telling people. H2S's point is that He generally referred to Himself as the Son of Man rather than the Son of God, because not all would understand it, as is clearly evidenced by the way the Jews reacted in that passage.

I believe He avoided calling Himself who He was: Son of God and God in the flesh out of making Himself of no reputation, so that he could serve God as a man and example to others.

Along the same lines He didn't want His ministry of miracles published abroad, so that it became to crowded for Him to speak, being filled with them only looking for signs, miracles, and loaves.

Which crowds would also draw the attention and envy of His enemies in the Jews Religion. Not to mention the eyes of the Roman ruler in a hotbed of Provincial rebellion.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I believe He avoided calling Himself who He was: Son of God and God in the flesh out of making Himself of no reputation, so that he could serve God as a man and example to others.

Along the same lines He didn't want His ministry of miracles published abroad, so that it became to crowded for Him to speak, being filled with them only looking for signs, miracles, and loaves.

Which crowds would also draw the attention and envy of His enemies in the Jews Religion. Not to mention the eyes of the Roman ruler in a hotbed of Provincial rebellion.

Yes, only there is more to it as well. At the heart of it. He did not reveal things to the spiritually imperceptive, and for several reasons. One is that all who receive revelation from God are held accountable for what they are shown. This is what He explained to the disciples in the following passage:

10 But when He was alone, those around Him with the twelve asked Him about the parable. 11 And He said to them, “To you it has been given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to those who are outside, all things come in parables, 12 so that ‘Seeing they may see and not perceive, and hearing they may hear and not understand; Lest they should turn, and their sins be forgiven them.’” (Mark 4:10-12)

Some interpret this as confirming Calvinism, but in reality what He was saying here was that those whose eyes and ears were spiritually shut were unable to receive true revelation from God, so He was only giving it to those who had them open. It is the same today. I was posting on another thread today and another member gives me this same feeling, just as others were stating likewise. If you are dead set on seeing things a certain way, you become almost incapable of seeing it any differently, no matter how many scriptures people provide to the contrary.