Messiah != Son of God

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8023
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Messiah != Son of God

Post by Peter Kirby »

This is an interesting bit. In the earliest Christian writings (presumably Paul), 'Christ Jesus' and 'the Son of God' are equated fairly breezily.**

In the third century, Origen wants to let us know that this is not something the Jews say about the Christ.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04161.htm
A Jew, however, would not admit that any prophet used the expression, The 'Son of God' will come; for the term which they employ is, The 'Christ of God?' will come. And many a time indeed do they directly interrogate us about the Son of God, saying that no such being exists, or was made the subject of prophecy. We do not of course assert that the Son of God is not the subject of prophecy; but we assert that he most inappropriately attributes to the Jewish disputant, who would not allow that He was, such language as, My prophet once declared in Jerusalem that the 'Son of God' will come.
(Origen frequently criticizes the 'Jew of Celsus' as being unrealistic.)

** There is also some apparent difference in the use of definite articles with Christ in Paul as compared to other literature.
https://books.google.com/books?id=iJwdOKwDKCUC&pg=PA179
https://books.google.com/books?id=vkBpAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA113
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Messiah != Son of God

Post by Giuseppe »

I think that only for proto-catholics being Messiah is a limited subset of being Son of God in 'pauline' terms.

In other terms, if you are a Messiah, then you are the Son of God too (this is the implication in Mark: Peter recognizes Jesus as the Jewish Messiah, but fails to see the larger set: Jesus is not only the Messiah, but is ALSO the Son of God).

But in Mcn Jesus is not the Jewish Messiah and therefore he is not the Son of Creator God. Mcn rejects the entire thing. Peter and the Jews (sic) believed wrongly that Jesus is the ''Messiah son of Joseph''.

The idea that the Jewish Messiah could be ALSO the Son of True God is basically proto-catholic in origin.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Messiah != Son of God

Post by rakovsky »

In Daniels book there is a prophecy about an apocalyptic seemingly supernatural son of man. Check out Daniel Boyarin a Talmudic scholar who sees these Christian ideas in the Tanakh.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Messiah != Son of God

Post by iskander »

rakovsky wrote:In Daniels book there is a prophecy about an apocalyptic seemingly supernatural son of man. Check out Daniel Boyarin a Talmudic scholar who sees these Christian ideas in the Tanakh.
It is difficult for people living now to understand what ancient cultures may have thought about religious themes in their time even if one feels part of the same religious community .For a non-religious mind it is even more difficult.

For example :according to the words of the sages the Torah has seventy aspects, and there are seventy aspects to each and every verse; in truth, therefore, the aspects are infinite. In each generation one of these aspects is revealed, and so in our generation the aspect which the Torah reveals to us concerns matters of redemption. Each and every verse can be understood and explained in reference to redemption.

The written text is understood differently by each generation and so it makes it impossible for every later generation to argue for a reality of the past, based on the sacred text they all have shared as the immutable eternal word of god .

The Messiah ,redeemer , could have been anything whatsoever to every past generations and it is very rarely that any record of their unique understanding survives its passing into the dust of history.
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Messiah != Son of God

Post by rakovsky »

iskander wrote:
rakovsky wrote:In Daniels book there is a prophecy about an apocalyptic seemingly supernatural son of man. Check out Daniel Boyarin a Talmudic scholar who sees these Christian ideas in the Tanakh.
It is difficult for people living now to understand what ancient cultures may have thought about religious themes in their time even if one feels part of the same religious community .For a non-religious mind it is even more difficult.

For example :according to the words of the sages the Torah has seventy aspects, and there are seventy aspects to each and every verse; in truth, therefore, the aspects are infinite. In each generation one of these aspects is revealed, and so in our generation the aspect which the Torah reveals to us concerns matters of redemption. Each and every verse can be understood and explained in reference to redemption.

The written text is understood differently by each generation and so it makes it impossible for every later generation to argue for a reality of the past, based on the sacred text they all have shared as the immutable eternal word of god .

The Messiah ,redeemer , could have been anything whatsoever to every past generations and it is very rarely that any record of their unique understanding survives its passing into the dust of history.
Interesting issue, although nowadays we do have glimpses into what some Jews thought of these texts back in the first couple centuries. AD.

In the Targum on Isaiah from the 2nd c. AD the rabbis mix in both the messiah and Israel as the servant's identity.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
User avatar
spin
Posts: 2146
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:44 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Messiah != Son of God

Post by spin »

rakovsky wrote:In Daniels book there is a prophecy about an apocalyptic seemingly supernatural son of man.
The passage is not about a son of man. It is about one like a son of man, ie like a human. This is in sync with the four beasts, one like a lion, one like a bear, etc. The one that has the appearance of a son of man is an angel. He takes Baal's place in a much older religious narrative in which Baal defeats Yamm, the sea, and as Baal rides the clouds back to heaven, so does the one like a son of man after having defeated the sea. Yes, the one like a son of man is not coming down, but coming up to heaven.
Dysexlia lures • ⅔ of what we see is behind our eyes
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Messiah != Son of God

Post by Ben C. Smith »

spin wrote:
rakovsky wrote:In Daniels book there is a prophecy about an apocalyptic seemingly supernatural son of man.
The passage is not about a son of man. It is about one like a son of man, ie like a human. This is in sync with the four beasts, one like a lion, one like a bear, etc. The one that has the appearance of a son of man is an angel. He takes Baal's place in a much older religious narrative in which Baal defeats Yamm, the sea, and as Baal rides the clouds back to heaven, so does the one like a son of man after having defeated the sea. Yes, the one like a son of man is not coming down, but coming up to heaven.
From the story of Ba'al and Yam, Column iv, translation by John C. L. Gibson in Canaanite Myths and Legends:

But Kothar-and-Khasis answered (him):
"Truly I tell you, O prince Ba'al,
I repeat (to you), O rider on the clouds,
Now (you must smite) your foes, Ba'al,
now you must smite your foes,
now you must still your enemies.
You shall take your everlasting kingdom,
your dominion for ever and ever
."

....

Yam collapsed (and) fell to the earth;
his joints quivered
and his form crumpled.
Ba'al dragged out Yam and laid him down,
he made an end of judge Nahar.
Athtart rebuked the Name, (saying):
"Scatter (him), O mightiest [Ba'al]!
Scatter (him), O rider on the clouds!"

Very Danielic. (Or, rather, Daniel is very Canaanite.) Ba'al is also called the rider on the clouds in the story of Ba'al and Môt (= death): viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2213&p=49365#p49365.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Messiah != Son of God

Post by rakovsky »

Interesting article on whether the son of man in Daniel is a divine Messiah:
https://inaspaciousplace.wordpress.com/ ... #more-7277

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Messiah != Son of God

Post by rakovsky »

Ben C. Smith wrote:[

Yam collapsed (and) fell to the earth;
his joints quivered
and his form crumpled.
Ba'al dragged out Yam and laid him down,
he made an end of judge Nahar.
Athtart rebuked the Name, (saying):
"Scatter (him), O mightiest [Ba'al]!
Scatter (him), O rider on the clouds!"[/box]
Very Danielic. (Or, rather, Daniel is very Canaanite.) Ba'al is also called the rider on the clouds in the story of Ba'al and Môt (= death): viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2213&p=49365#p49365.
Yes.
The coming on the clouds issue is something Boyarin picked up on.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Messiah != Son of God

Post by Bernard Muller »

I have a piece about Jesus as Son of God in http://historical-jesus.info/hjes3x.html then "find" on Jesus as the "Son" (of God)

Here it is in the raw (but better presented on my website):
B) Jesus as the "Son" (of God) or having God as his Father appears mainly in Paul's last (authentic) letters (2cCorinthians, Galatians, cPhilippians & Romans, written late 56 to early 57):
2cCo1:3,19,31, Gal1:16,2:20,4:4,6, Ro1:3,4,9,5:10,8:3,29,31,15:6 (altogether fifteen times, within about 11650 words).
Jesus as "Son" or having God as his Father is featured only a few times in Paul's early letters (1Thessalonians, 1Corinthians, 2a&bCorinthians, 2a&bPhilippians & Philemon, written 50 to 56):
1Th1:10, 1Co1:9,15:28 (altogether three times, within about 12430 words)

Remark: as a net result, there are about five times more frequency of occurrences of Jesus, as the "Son" (of God) or having God as his Father, in the later epistles as compared to the earlier ones.

Also, 1Th1:10, 1Co1:4-9 and 1Co15:23-28 are very likely latter interpolations (for justifications, please click on 1Th1:10, 1Co1:4-9 and 1Co15:23-28).
I want to stress the authenticity of the aforementioned passages is contested for many suspicious items, not only because of "Son". And let's say, in '1Thessalonians' and '1Corinthians', Paul was unlikely to mention Jesus as "the Son", because he wrote:
"God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ" (1Th1:1)
"our God and Father" (1Th1:3)
"our God and Father himself and our Lord Jesus" (1Th3:11)
"... our God and Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus ..." (1Th3:13)
"Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." (1Co1:3)
"For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many gods and many lords, [for Paul, as it seems here, "lords" are not "gods"]
` yet for us there is one God, the Father ... and one Lord Jesus Christ ..." (1Co8:5-6a)
"the heavenly man [Jesus]" (1Co15:48,49)
Paul was reluctant to approve Jesus as the "Son of God". That did not come from Paul; but because of its acceptance among Gentile Christians, he had to adopt it later on. And in his letters to the Corinthians, Paul made the (clever) transition
TO: 2Co1:19a "For the Son of God, Jesus Christ ..."
FROM: 1Co1:3 "Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."
as follows: 2Co1:3a "... the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ ..."

Eleven occurrences of Jesus as "Son (of God)" are in 'Hebrews' but there is nothing in Paul's letters about an explanation/basis for Jesus as the pre-existent "Son of God" (but it is in 'Hebrews'!).

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
Post Reply