Talk:Son of God

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Removed from article: In Greek Mythology you will find many Sons (and Daughters) of God, but apart from mythology it was very common to call a wise and holy person Son of God. The early Cristians named Jesus a Son of God, to say he was a wise and holy person indeed. This all within Roman Civilisation, with many many Gods around, in the Helenistic melting pot. Later, when Cristians were in power, they said Jesus is the only Son of God, so the Christians were very human indeed.

Is any of this true? ---rmhermen

Well, there were many sons and daughters of Zeus, but calling him "God" seems a confusion of the issues. As for the conclusion that Christians were very human indeed--can one person be more human than another? The last sentence seems like a candidate for the scrap heap. "Christian" does indeed have an "h" between the C and the R. And "Hellenistic" has two l's. I can't speak for the content, though. It sounds like filler for bad jokes and other deleted nonsense, though it may just need considerable expansion and citation. --Koyaanis Qatsi

The bit about Christians calling Jesus "a Son of God" because he was "a wise and holy man" is tripe. Jesus was recognized as the only Son of God by his followers (see John 3:16, Hebrews 11:17, 1 John 4:9, and 1 John 5:5 for examples), and his enemies in the Jewish power base plotted his death because Jesus claimed equality with God (see John 5:18, for example). <>< tbc

Well certaintly that was what they came to believe at some point; whether they always believed that or whether the belief was a later development is an open question, as is whether all of Jesus' followers believed that or whether it was only some group. The New Testament was written several decades after Jesus' death, and certaintly its authors did not represent the full range of thought in earliest Christianity (otherwise, why is it filled with warnings about 'false teachers'?). So exactly what the earliest followers of Jesus believed we don't know. -- Simon J Kissane

so the only candidate for restoral is "[In Greek society] it was very common to call a wise and holy person Son of God"? Hm. What was intended by this article, anyway? A historical examination of people claiming to be the Son of God? Or a partisan screed about Jesus Christ? Regardless of what was originally intended, what should it be? Has anyone other than Jesus claimed to be the son of God? --KQ

yay, another opportunity for a LIST O' LINKS - Son of God, the List! Actually, I vote that this was a partisan screed, and personally suggest a deep breath, a quick edit to remove the worst parts, remembering the idea of sonship (in which all Christians become Sons of God), and moving on to other articles. --MichaelTinkler

There are several fairly obscure references to sons of God in the Old Testament. e.g. Genesis (6:2) writes about sons of God marrying daughters of men. In the New Testament, John (1:12) says of Jesus "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name". The Lord's prayer begins with the words "Our Father", suggesting that according to Jesus we are all sons or daughters of God. In contrast, however, there are many passages where Jesus is referred to as *the* son of God, or as the *only begotten* son of God. This suggests that there are two distinct traditions being melded in the gospels, or perhaps two distinct phrases both being translated as "son of God". --Martin Gradwell.

The "Our Father" correlates with Jesus (supposedly?) saying "The Father" and not "My Father". Something like "none is greater than the father" or some such thing. I have no idea, no bible handy and not worth searching for it. JoeHenzi 07:10, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Contents 1 No citations? 2 Listings of other "Son(s) of God" 3 /*In the New Testament*/ 4 NPOV

[edit] No citations?

The sources used in the creation of the article should be cited in the article. - ChessPlayer 01:27, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Listings of other "Son(s) of God"

I don't know when this will be seen next, although religion is a hot topic on wikipedia.. There should be a listing for other "Sons of God". It would help with historical research as Jesus Christ isn't the only one ever believed to be the Son of God. It's pretty lame that we have only Hebrew vs New Testament stuff. Don't get me wrong, I want to add them myself, but I'm not an expert on the topic and I could only add things which I found on other sites (which don't reveal their sources). I'll come back and make a listing if I can. Problem is most Internet/Google/Yahoo! searches bring back results based on stuff which is against Jesus, something I'd like to stay away from as a "real" source. Get what I mean? If anyone can help, please do. JoeHenzi 11:50, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] /*In the New Testament*/

Could someone please make this text a readable one? For someone wants to learn about the Son of God in the New Testament, the text is not very enlightening. Maybe someone should paraphrase some of the quotes into normal sentences about what the Son of God is. Thank you.

[edit] NPOV

Much of the section "Son of God" in Judeo-Christian terms seems to include unattributed conclusions about how biblical phrases and translations are used or should be translated. Without attribution, it amounts to POV original research. -Rholton 13:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I cleaned up the New Testament section extensively and removed the tags. Because there was so much text I was unable to reconcile, I'm including it here in case someone else wants to try.--Ephilei 07:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

The question arises as to whether the term "son of God" possesses in the New Testament the same sense found three centuries later at the time of the Nicene creed. However, the New Testament teaching that God appeared in the form of man (as Jesus) does not depend on whether "Son of God" normally has this Nicene meaning. John's Gospel explicitly says that God appeared in the form of man (Jn 1:14; cf 1:1), and Paul taught that Jesus created the world (Colossians 1:16). This eventually affected the Christian usage of the term "son of God", as Raymond Brown explains.

Some say that the Gospel of John and the First Epistle of John have given the term "son of God" a meta-physical and dogmatic significance. Many hold that the Jewish Alexandrian Logos concept has had a formative and dominant influence on the presentation of the doctrine of Jesus' sonship in the Christian writings. The Logos in Philo is designated as the "son of God"; the Logos is the first-born; God is the father of the Logos ("De Agricultura Noe," § 12; "De Profugis," § 20).

However, since in Matthew's Gospel God himself specially speaks from heaven to call Jesus his Son (Matt 3:17), and since the devil assumes that the true "son of God" can perform miracles (Matt 4:3), and since Jesus says he will judge all men (25:31), the Gospel of Matthew does not simply present Jesus as a good man. According to this theory, all the authors of the New Testament and all the first century followers of Jesus which these earliest Christian books of the New Testament represent, collectively misunderstood a basic claim of Jesus, while all who did understand happened to leave no surviving records. Many scholars find this theory historically unconvincing.

Christians believe the Resurrection of Jesus vindicates Jesus's claim to a unique relationship to the Father.